ArticlePeerJ2020
Recalibration of mapping quality scores in Illumina short-read alignments improves SNP detection results in low-coverage sequencing data.
Article in PeerJ, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quantifying reference alignment bias in functional genomics analyses.Cell reports methods · 2026Article
- Long-Read MDM4 Sequencing Reveals Aberrant Isoform Landscape in Metastatic Melanomas.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Short-read aligner performance in germline variant identification.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Review
- Strobealign: flexible seed size enables ultra-fast and accurate read alignment.Genome biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLow-coverage sequencing is a cost-effective way to obtain reads spanning an entire genome. However, read depth at each locus is low, making sequencing error difficult to separate from actual variation. Prior to variant calling, sequencer reads are aligned to a reference genome, with alignments stored in Sequence Alignment/Map (SAM) files. Each alignment has a mapping quality (MAPQ) score indicating the probability a read is incorrectly aligned. This study investigated the recalibration of probability estimates used to compute MAPQ scores for improving variant calling performance in single-sample, low-coverage settings. MATERIALS AND
methodsSimulated tomato, hot pepper and rice genomes were implanted with known variants. From these, simulated paired-end reads were generated at low coverage and aligned to the original reference genomes. Features extracted from the SAM formatted alignment files for tomato were used to train machine learning models to detect incorrectly aligned reads and output estimates of the probability of misalignment for each read in all three data sets. MAPQ scores were then re-computed from these estimates. Next, the SAM files were updated with new MAPQ scores. Finally, Variant calling was performed on the original and recalibrated alignments and the results compared.
resultsIncorrectly aligned reads comprised only 0.16% of the reads in the training set. This severe class imbalance required special consideration for model training. The F1 score for detecting misaligned reads ranged from 0.76 to 0.82. The best performing model was used to compute new MAPQ scores. Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) detection was improved after mapping score recalibration. In rice, recall for called SNPs increased by 5.2%, while for tomato and pepper it increased by 3.1% and 1.5%, respectively. For all three data sets the precision of SNP calls ranged from 0.91 to 0.95, and was largely unchanged both before and after mapping score recalibration.
conclusionRecalibrating MAPQ scores delivers modest improvements in single-sample variant calling results. Some variant callers operate on multiple samples simultaneously. They exploit every sample's reads to compensate for the low read-depth of individual samples. This improves polymorphism detection and genotype inference. It may be that small improvements in single-sample settings translate to larger gains in a multi-sample experiment. A study to investigate this is ongoing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.