The current GATK version is 3.7-0
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04

#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

#### ☞ Did you remember to?

1. Search using the upper-right search box, e.g. using the error message.
2. Try the latest version of tools.
3. Include tool and Java versions.
4. Tell us whether you are following GATK Best Practices.
5. Include relevant details, e.g. platform, DNA- or RNA-Seq, WES (+capture kit) or WGS (PCR-free or PCR+), paired- or single-end, read length, expected average coverage, somatic data, etc.
6. For tool errors, include the error stacktrace as well as the exact command.
7. For format issues, include the result of running ValidateSamFile for BAMs or ValidateVariants for VCFs.
8. For weird results, include an illustrative example, e.g. attach IGV screenshots according to Article#5484.
9. For a seeming variant that is uncalled, include results of following Article#1235.

#### ☞ Did we ask for a bug report?

Then follow instructions in Article#1894.

#### ☞ Formatting tip!

Surround blocks of code, error messages and BAM/VCF snippets--especially content with hashes (#)--with lines with three backticks ( ` ) each to make a code block.
Picard 2.9.0 is now available. Download and read release notes here.
GATK 3.7 is here! Be sure to read the Version Highlights and optionally the full Release Notes.

# Variant Annotator annotations

Member Posts: 4
edited January 2013

I am trying to understand how Variant Annotator functions. I took the vcf file from the output of UnifiedGenotyper and ran Variant Annotator with the same .bam and .bed files I used for running UnifiedGenotyper. I expected that all the calculations in the INFO field will remain the same, since I am using the same input files. However, I find that some fields have different values. Here is an example:
UnifiedGenotyper output:

chr22   30094366        .       G       A       172.01  .       AC=1;AF=0.500;AN=2;BaseQRankSum=3.182;DP=244;DS;Dels=0.00;FS=0.000;HaplotypeScore=118.5897;MLEAC=1;MLEAF=0.500;MQ=43.29;MQ0=0;MQRankSum=-0.049;QD=0.70;ReadPosRankSum=1.428;SB=-6.201e+01        GT:AD:DP:GQ:PL  0/1:220,19:244:99:202,0,2693

VariantAnnotator output:

chr22   30094366        .       G       A       172.01  .       ABHet=0.923;AC=1;AF=0.500;AN=2;BaseQRankSum=3.182;DP=993;DS;Dels=0.00;FS=0.000;HaplotypeScore=454.8386;MLEAC=1;MLEAF=0.500;MQ=43.29;MQ0=0;MQ0Fraction=0.0000;MQRankSum=-0.378;OND=0.034;QD=0.17;ReadPosRankSum=-4.859;SB=-6.201e+01      GT:AD:DP:GQ:PL  0/1:220,19:244:99:202,0,2693

I am running GATKLite 2.1. Notice the DP in the info field has a different value. HaplotypeScore, QD, MQRankSum, etc have different values as well. Am I doing anything wrong? Shouldn't these values be the same when I recalculate these fields using VariantAnnotator?

Post edited by Geraldine_VdAuwera on
Tagged:

The Unified Genotyper has a different default downsampling value compared to other tools like VariantAnnotator (which use the engine's default downsampling setting). So when you run VariantAnnotator, you're looking at more reads than with the UG, which changes some of the annotation values accordingly.

Geraldine Van der Auwera, PhD

These topics have been addressed more or less directly in the following articles:

Unfortunately right now our documentation system isn't configured to emit that information concisely in one place. We're aware that this is not an ideal situation and we plan to rectify it, but it might take a while. In the meantime the most reliable way to find out is to look it up in the codebase, although this is admittedly not really straightforward if you are not comfortable with Java code.

Geraldine Van der Auwera, PhD

The Unified Genotyper has a different default downsampling value compared to other tools like VariantAnnotator (which use the engine's default downsampling setting). So when you run VariantAnnotator, you're looking at more reads than with the UG, which changes some of the annotation values accordingly.

Geraldine Van der Auwera, PhD

Also, the two apply different read filters by default, which may account for part of the differences as well.

Geraldine Van der Auwera, PhD

• Member Posts: 4

Thanks for the clarification. Is there a way to find out what are all the read filters and default thresholds applied in each program?