Closed VLeducq closed 1 year ago
@VLeducq ,
There's been a lot of parameter updates between r0.5 and r0.8. So a lot of reads with lower mapqs or baseqs would not make the depth. So this difference is expected.
Thank you for your answer. Therefore, is it still correct to call variants on a sample with an average 10X coverage ?
I would say yes, our analysis shows higher accuracy at 10x with new version. One thing I would suggest is that if you working with a diploid genome then you expect 5x per haplotype with 10x. With that and the error-rate of the sequencing device, it becomes difficult to call variants accurately. We generally suggest between 15x-20x to get a set of variants that are better suitable for high-quality downstream analysis.
Hello,
I ran the r0.8 version on data previously analyzed with the r0.5 version. I systematically get a ~10x lower coverage across the entire genome for all my samples (from ~100X with r0.5 to ~10X with r0.8). Because of this, I have difficulty detecting variants in regions with lower coverage. Is there an explanation related to the r0.8 version ? The data is the same. Same BAM files.
Thank you !