Heads up:
We’re moving the GATK website, docs and forum to a new platform. Read the full story and breakdown of key changes on this blog.
Notice:
If you happen to see a question you know the answer to, please do chime in and help your fellow community members. We encourage our fourm members to be more involved, jump in and help out your fellow researchers with their questions. GATK forum is a community forum and helping each other with using GATK tools and research is the cornerstone of our success as a genomics research community.We appreciate your help!

Test-drive the GATK tools and Best Practices pipelines on Terra


Check out this blog post to learn how you can get started with GATK and try out the pipelines in preconfigured workspaces (with a user-friendly interface!) without having to install anything.
Attention:
We will be out of the office for a Broad Institute event from Dec 10th to Dec 11th 2019. We will be back to monitor the GATK forum on Dec 12th 2019. In the meantime we encourage you to help out other community members with their queries.
Thank you for your patience!

HaplotypeCaller may fail to detect variant with the same reads with a different composition.

maikedamaikeda JapanMember ✭
edited February 2018 in Ask the GATK team

I have experienced a variant detection issue with confusion. The png file attached is the result of exact same NextSeq experiment but the read extraction range is different.

NextSeq2_point.bam: bam is composed of the reads which cover chr16: 89100686 position only.

NextSeq2_region.bam: bam is composed of the reads which cover the region of chr16: 89100686 +-100bp.
On position chr16:89100686, I presume T>C should be detected, but HaplotypeCaller failed to detect the variant with NextSeq2_region.bam.

NextSeq2_point.vcf:
chr16 89100686 . T C,<NON_REF> 7397.77 . DP=199;ExcessHet=3.0103;MLEAC=2,0;MLEAF=1.00,0.00;RAW_MQ=716400.00 GT:AD:DP:GQ:PL:SB 1/1:0,199,0:199:99:7426,599,0,7426,599,7426:0,0,155,44

NextSeq2_region.vcf:
chr16 89100686 . T <NON_REF> . . . GT:AD:DP:GQ:PL 0/0:0,199:199:0:0,0,0

What causes the difference and why?

--- GATK Version (Docker latest)
    Using GATK wrapper script /gatk/build/install/gatk/bin/gatk
    Running:
        /gatk/build/install/gatk/bin/gatk HaplotypeCaller --version
    Version:4.0.1.2
---

--- Command used
gatk HaplotypeCaller -I /temp/NextSeq2_region.bam -O /temp/NextSeq2_region.vcf -R /temp/genome.fa -L /temp/only16.bed --debug true --output-mode EMIT_ALL_SITES --all-site-pls true --dont-trim-active-regions true --emit-ref-confidence BP_RESOLUTION
---
--- Genome Version: hg38
--- bed
chr16   89100681    89101347    NM_174917.4_cds_2_0_chr16_89100682_f    0   +

If you need the bams and vcfs, I can post them here.

Tagged:
· Share on Twitter Share on Google+

Answers

  • SheilaSheila Broad InstituteMember, Broadie admin

    @maikeda
    Hi,

    Can you confirm the base qualities are all good/high in the region BAM file? Are the base qualities better in the point BAM file?

    Thanks,
    Sheila

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • maikedamaikeda JapanMember ✭

    Thank you, Sheila.
    Two bam's reads are identical. The "point BAM" is a subset of the "region BAM." The base qualities of the read are high enough, I think. The image below shows the overview of base quality. Shaded base's quality is less than 30 here.

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • SheilaSheila Broad InstituteMember, Broadie admin

    @maikeda
    Hi,
    Just to confirm, when you say shaded bases, you mean basically all the bases in your screenshot? Can you check if the base qualities for the missed sites are higher than 20? If they are, I may need you to submit a bug report.

    Thanks,
    Sheila

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • maikedamaikeda JapanMember ✭

    Thank you. Sheila.

    Almost all the bases have base quality value over 20.

    The following shows a pileup sequence of "NextSeq2_region.bam."

    $ samtools mpileup -r chr16:89100686-89100686 NextSeq2_region.bam
chr16   89100686    N   199 CcCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCcccccCCCCcccCCCCCCCCCCCcccCCCCCCCCCCCCcCcCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCcccccCCCCCCCCCCCCCcCcccccccCCCCCCCCcCCCCCCCCCCCCCcccccCCCCCCCCcccCCCCCCCCCCCccccCCCCCCccc^]C^]C^]C^]C^]C^]C^]C^]C^]C^]C^]c   D<[email protected]<<<;;EEED<<<EEEEDEEDEDE=<=DEEEEDEDEDDE<D:DDDEEEDDDEEEEDDDEDEDD<<<<<DDEDEEEDEDDEE:D<<<===5DEDEEDDE;DEEDEDDDEEEEE<<<<<DDBBAAAA;:;[email protected]@@@[email protected]@[email protected]:

    Small fraction of bases are fallen under base quality value 20.

    As a reference, version of the samtools to create pileup is following.

    $ samtools --version
samtools 1.7-5-g2bd9d6b
Using htslib 1.7-23-g9f9631d
Copyright (C) 2018 Genome Research Ltd.
    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • SheilaSheila Broad InstituteMember, Broadie admin

    @maikeda
    Hi,

    Alright, I am not sure what is going on. Can you submit a bug report? Instructions are here.

    Thanks,
    Sheila

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • maikedamaikeda JapanMember ✭

    Thank you. Sheila.

    I put a report on the ftp server. The filename is 11436_gatk_report.tar.gz, just in case.

    The older version of GATK's results are also included.
    Based on this result, gatk_3.2-2 and gatk_3.3-0 could detect the variant I mentioned, but gatk 3.4-46 and newer failed to detect it.

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+

    Issue · Github
    by shlee

    Issue Number
    3008
    State
    closed
    Last Updated
    Assignee
    Array
    Closed By
    sooheelee
  • shleeshlee CambridgeMember, Broadie ✭✭✭✭✭

    Thanks, @maikeda. We've received your bug report data and will follow up with you soon.

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • shleeshlee CambridgeMember, Broadie ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2018

    Hi @maikeda, I'm just letting you know I can recapitulate your observations. I am consulting with the team currently. Our developer is away at a workshop currently and can take a look next week. Thanks for your patience.

    Post edited by shlee on
    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • maikedamaikeda JapanMember ✭

    Thank you, Shell.
    I'm glad to know you could replicate the result. I am looking forward to hearing from you next week.
    Have a nice weekend.

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • shleeshlee CambridgeMember, Broadie ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited November 2018

    @maikeda, it appears this followup fell through the cracks. Apologies. Sheila left the group for greener pastures a few months back. The developers followed up in https://github.com/broadinstitute/gatk/issues/4561.

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
  • maikedamaikeda JapanMember ✭

    Thank you @shlee. I thought that my question was completely forgotten and remains unresolved. Anyway, it looks like unresolved.

    · Share on Twitter Share on Google+
Sign In or Register to comment.