ArticleHeredity2025
Quantifying the effects of computational filter criteria on the accurate identification of de novo mutations at varying levels of sequencing coverage.
Article in Heredity, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Effect of Age and Sex on the Rate of Germline Mutations in Barn Owls.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Characterization of de novo germline mutations suggests a strong male mutation bias in coppery titi monkeys (Plecturocebus cupreus).Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The rate of spontaneous (de novo) germline mutation is a key parameter in evolutionary biology, impacting genetic diversity and contributing to the evolution of populations and species. Mutation rates themselves evolve over time but the mechanisms underlying the mutation rate variation observed across the Tree of Life remain largely to be elucidated. In recent years, whole genome sequencing has enabled the estimation of mutation rates for several organisms. However, due to a lack of community standards, many previous studies differ both empirically - most notably, in the depth of sequencing used to reliably identify de novo mutations - and computationally - utilizing different computational pipelines to detect germline mutations as well as different analysis strategies to mitigate technical artifacts - rendering comparisons between studies challenging. Using a pedigree of Western chimpanzees as an illustrative example, we here quantify the effects of commonly utilized quality metrics to reliably identify de novo mutations at different levels of sequencing coverage. We demonstrate that datasets with a mean depth of ≤ 30X are ill-suited for the detection of de novo mutations due to high false positive rates that can only be partially mitigated by computational filter criteria. In contrast, higher coverage datasets enable a comprehensive identification of de novo mutations at low false positive rates, with minimal benefits beyond a sequencing coverage of 60X, suggesting that future work should favor breadth (by sequencing additional individuals) over depth. Importantly, the simulation and analysis framework described here provides conceptual guidelines that will allow researchers to take study design and species-specific resources into account when determining computational filtering strategies for their organism of interest.
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.