Cargando…
Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing
BACKGROUND: Discovering single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from agriculture crop genome sequences has been a widely used strategy for developing genetic markers for several applications including marker-assisted breeding, population diversity studies for eco-geographical adaption, genotyping cro...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7430858/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32807073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-03704-1 |
_version_ | 1783571495433273344 |
---|---|
author | Yao, Zhen You, Frank M. N’Diaye, Amidou Knox, Ron E. McCartney, Curt Hiebert, Colin W. Pozniak, Curtis Xu, Wayne |
author_facet | Yao, Zhen You, Frank M. N’Diaye, Amidou Knox, Ron E. McCartney, Curt Hiebert, Colin W. Pozniak, Curtis Xu, Wayne |
author_sort | Yao, Zhen |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Discovering single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from agriculture crop genome sequences has been a widely used strategy for developing genetic markers for several applications including marker-assisted breeding, population diversity studies for eco-geographical adaption, genotyping crop germplasm collections, and others. Accurately detecting SNPs from large polyploid crop genomes such as wheat is crucial and challenging. A few variant calling methods have been previously developed but they show a low concordance between their variant calls. A gold standard of variant sets generated from one human individual sample was established for variant calling tool evaluations, however hitherto no gold standard of crop variant set is available for wheat use. The intent of this study was to evaluate seven SNP variant calling tools (FreeBayes, GATK, Platypus, Samtools/mpileup, SNVer, VarScan, VarDict) with the two most popular mapping tools (BWA-mem and Bowtie2) on wheat whole exome capture (WEC) re-sequencing data from allohexaploid wheat. RESULTS: We found the BWA-mem mapping tool had both a higher mapping rate and a higher accuracy rate than Bowtie2. With the same mapping quality (MQ) cutoff, BWA-mem detected more variant bases in mapping reads than Bowtie2. The reads preprocessed with quality trimming or duplicate removal did not significantly affect the final mapping performance in terms of mapped reads. Based on the concordance and receiver operating characteristic (ROC), the Samtools/mpileup variant calling tool with BWA-mem mapping of raw sequence reads outperformed other tests followed by FreeBayes and GATK in terms of specificity and sensitivity. VarDict and VarScan were the poorest performing variant calling tools with the wheat WEC sequence data. CONCLUSION: The BWA-mem and Samtools/mpileup pipeline, with no need to preprocess the raw read data before mapping onto the reference genome, was ascertained the optimum for SNP calling for the complex wheat genome re-sequencing. These results also provide useful guidelines for reliable variant identification from deep sequencing of other large polyploid crop genomes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7430858 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-74308582020-08-18 Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing Yao, Zhen You, Frank M. N’Diaye, Amidou Knox, Ron E. McCartney, Curt Hiebert, Colin W. Pozniak, Curtis Xu, Wayne BMC Bioinformatics Research Article BACKGROUND: Discovering single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from agriculture crop genome sequences has been a widely used strategy for developing genetic markers for several applications including marker-assisted breeding, population diversity studies for eco-geographical adaption, genotyping crop germplasm collections, and others. Accurately detecting SNPs from large polyploid crop genomes such as wheat is crucial and challenging. A few variant calling methods have been previously developed but they show a low concordance between their variant calls. A gold standard of variant sets generated from one human individual sample was established for variant calling tool evaluations, however hitherto no gold standard of crop variant set is available for wheat use. The intent of this study was to evaluate seven SNP variant calling tools (FreeBayes, GATK, Platypus, Samtools/mpileup, SNVer, VarScan, VarDict) with the two most popular mapping tools (BWA-mem and Bowtie2) on wheat whole exome capture (WEC) re-sequencing data from allohexaploid wheat. RESULTS: We found the BWA-mem mapping tool had both a higher mapping rate and a higher accuracy rate than Bowtie2. With the same mapping quality (MQ) cutoff, BWA-mem detected more variant bases in mapping reads than Bowtie2. The reads preprocessed with quality trimming or duplicate removal did not significantly affect the final mapping performance in terms of mapped reads. Based on the concordance and receiver operating characteristic (ROC), the Samtools/mpileup variant calling tool with BWA-mem mapping of raw sequence reads outperformed other tests followed by FreeBayes and GATK in terms of specificity and sensitivity. VarDict and VarScan were the poorest performing variant calling tools with the wheat WEC sequence data. CONCLUSION: The BWA-mem and Samtools/mpileup pipeline, with no need to preprocess the raw read data before mapping onto the reference genome, was ascertained the optimum for SNP calling for the complex wheat genome re-sequencing. These results also provide useful guidelines for reliable variant identification from deep sequencing of other large polyploid crop genomes. BioMed Central 2020-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC7430858/ /pubmed/32807073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-03704-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Yao, Zhen You, Frank M. N’Diaye, Amidou Knox, Ron E. McCartney, Curt Hiebert, Colin W. Pozniak, Curtis Xu, Wayne Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing |
title | Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing |
title_full | Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing |
title_short | Evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing |
title_sort | evaluation of variant calling tools for large plant genome re-sequencing |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7430858/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32807073 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12859-020-03704-1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yaozhen evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing AT youfrankm evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing AT ndiayeamidou evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing AT knoxrone evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing AT mccartneycurt evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing AT hiebertcolinw evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing AT pozniakcurtis evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing AT xuwayne evaluationofvariantcallingtoolsforlargeplantgenomeresequencing |