ArticleGenetics2026
Benchmarking genomic variant calling tools in inbred mouse strains: recommendations and considerations.
Article in Genetics, 2026. 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.
- Modest increase in the de novo single-nucleotide mutation rate in house mice born by assisted reproduction.Genome research · 2026Article
- Increased rate ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the growing affordability of whole-genome sequencing, variant identification has become an increasingly common task in modern genomics. In recent years, the number of software packages available for variant calling has rapidly increased. Understanding the benefits and drawbacks of different tools is important in setting leading practices. These considerations are especially crucial in model organism research, as many variant calling tools assume outbred genomes and implicit heterozygosity, conditions that do not apply to inbred laboratory models. Here, we present an analysis of multiple widely used variant calling tools and their performance in the simulated genomes of the C57BL/6J inbred laboratory mouse and 9 non-reference strains. Our findings reveal a tradeoff between the recall and precision of different tools. Balancing these considerations, we show that an optimal variant call set is obtained by using an ensemble approach focused on the intersection of variants reported by multiple callers. However, specific variant calling recommendations vary by strain and analytical goals. Further, we identify empirical filters for improving the performance of different variant calling tools, both for the discovery of rare variants and in the identification of strain polymorphisms. Overall, our simulation-based analysis provides best practices for calling and filtering genomic variants in inbred organisms, particularly laboratory mice.
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.