The current GATK version is 3.8-0
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.

Got a problem?

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
Download the latest Picard release at
GATK version 4.beta.3 (i.e. the third beta release) is out. See the GATK4 beta page for download and details.

UnifiedGenotyper: different -glm values result in different annotated values

tommycarstensentommycarstensen United KingdomMember

I have run UnifiedGenotyper with the -glm options SNP and BOTH. These two approaches yield identical variants and identical genotype likelihoods (at least the first 100k variants I checked). However, a few of the annotations have different values:

-glm SNP on the left and -glm BOTH on the right:

MQRankSum=-1.762 MQRankSum=-1.785

MQRankSum=-5.307 MQRankSum=-4.970

MQRankSum=0.262 MQRankSum=-0.022

MQRankSum=-0.680 MQRankSum=-0.710

MQRankSum=1.016 MQRankSum=0.231

MQRankSum=-0.693 MQRankSum=-0.681

MQRankSum=-0.839 MQRankSum=-0.830

MQRankSum=1.924 MQRankSum=1.889

MQRankSum=-0.991 MQRankSum=-0.665

MQRankSum=-0.459 MQRankSum=-0.958

BaseQRankSum=-1.803 BaseQRankSum=-1.881

BaseQRankSum=6.918 BaseQRankSum=6.894

BaseQRankSum=-2.512 BaseQRankSum=-2.524

BaseQRankSum=2.000 BaseQRankSum=2.020

BaseQRankSum=2.095 BaseQRankSum=2.006

BaseQRankSum=2.134 BaseQRankSum=2.223

BaseQRankSum=-3.622 BaseQRankSum=-3.547

BaseQRankSum=1.569 BaseQRankSum=1.586

BaseQRankSum=-3.416 BaseQRankSum=-3.733

BaseQRankSum=-1.745 BaseQRankSum=-1.769

ReadPosRankSum=-0.341 ReadPosRankSum=-0.280

ReadPosRankSum=4.207 ReadPosRankSum=4.190

ReadPosRankSum=-3.809 ReadPosRankSum=-3.832

ReadPosRankSum=-2.047 ReadPosRankSum=-2.060

ReadPosRankSum=-1.279 ReadPosRankSum=-1.232

ReadPosRankSum=-3.921 ReadPosRankSum=-3.955

ReadPosRankSum=-1.500 ReadPosRankSum=-1.486

ReadPosRankSum=-0.374 ReadPosRankSum=-0.403

ReadPosRankSum=3.209 ReadPosRankSum=3.188

ReadPosRankSum=1.889 ReadPosRankSum=1.868

Why is that?

I noticed another user got different variants, but I get the same variants and the same likelihoods:

I ran single threaded.

I use MQRankSum and ReadPosRankSum for VariantRecalibrator, so it affects my downstream results, if the annotations are -glm dependent. Hence I am asking my question. I hope you can illuminate me. Thank you.

Best Answer


  • tommycarstensentommycarstensen United KingdomMember

    Makes sense. Thank you.

Sign In or Register to comment.