Hi GATK Users,

Happy Thanksgiving!
Our staff will be observing the holiday and will be unavailable from 22nd to 25th November. This will cause a delay in reaching out to you and answering your questions immediately. Rest assured we will get back to it on Monday November 26th. We are grateful for your support and patience.
Have a great holiday everyone!!!

Regards
GATK Staff

RNA-Seq variants from 2-step alignments

Hi,

Thank you for providing guidelines on RNA-Seq variant discovery. For our data, we are currently playing with multiple mapping methods and have noticed that 2-step alignments work "better" than 1-step alignments. By 2-step alignments, I mean using STAR as step1 and then take the unmapped from this and use another aligner (like Bowtie2) for alignment. If I use such a methodology, will there be an issue in variant calling when during splitting cigar strings I ask it convert the 255 MAPQ to another value (like 60 in the best practices example), since bowtie2 gives different MAPQ scores. Sorry if this seems like a stupid question, but I am just a little curious how such a thing might affect the variant calls. Any insights/comment on this will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks!

Answers

  • SheilaSheila Broad InstituteMember, Broadie, Moderator admin

    @aggp11‌

    Hello,

    This should not cause any problems with reassigning mapping qualities, however, we cannot guarantee it because we have not tested it ourselves.

    Is there a reason you are not doing both alignment steps with STAR?

    -Sheila

  • Is it ion torrent data? That kind of two-stepper seems to be commonplace for ion RNAseq data these days.

    The point of the second step is to align the initially non-mapping reads with more sensitive settings.

Sign In or Register to comment.