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!

Get notifications!


You can opt in to receive email notifications, for example when your questions get answered or when there are new announcements, by following the instructions given here.

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!


Wrap blocks of code, error messages and BAM/VCF snippets--especially content with hashes (#)--with lines with three backticks ( ``` ) each to make a code block as demonstrated here.

Jump to another community
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.

ReassignMappingQuality and variant calling

gatk2013gatk2013 Posts: 15
edited June 2013 in Ask the GATK team

Hello!

I'm trying to call variants from bowtie-aligned reads, I used PrintReads with ReassignMappingQuality filter to give all reads a mapping score of 60 to replace default value of 255. However, I'm wondering if this assignment would introduce any bias in variant calling.

Thanks a lot!

Best Answers

Answers

  • gatk2013gatk2013 Posts: 15

    Thank you, Carneiro. Bowtie doesn't report mapping qual (255 for not available). Actually I'm just testing if it is okay to use bowtie with gatk.

  • gatk2013gatk2013 Posts: 15

    @Geraldine_VdAuwera said:
    We do have users who report using data aligned with Bowtie, and assigning qualities using the ReassignMappingQuality filter, but we recommend using an aligner that does report mapping qualities. Having a reasonably accurate estimate of mapping quality empowers the GATK tools to distinguish real variants from artifacts.

    Thanks a lot. I got it.

  • virenpatelvirenpatel Posts: 7

    bowtie2 reports an 'alignment score' in the optional AS:i and XS:i fields of a SAM file. bowtie2 has some advantages over bwa. instead of pushing bwa maybe gatk ought to consider the AS:i field if it's available.

  • Geraldine_VdAuweraGeraldine_VdAuwera Cambridge, MAPosts: 11,736 admin

    @virenpatel, it is not practical for us to start taking into account alternative metrics that are stored in optional fields. Presumably if this alignment score was directly equivalent to mapping quality, that's where it would be reported. Since it's reported elsewhere, chances are it is calculated differently and has a different meaning. If so we would need to build in additional utilities in order to convert the values appropriately into mapping qualities. If this was trivial I assume the developers of bowtie would have their tool generate the mapping qualities directly. So I'm sorry, but no, we can't do that.

    Geraldine Van der Auwera, PhD

Sign In or Register to comment.