Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago
I agree that having VCF output is crucial. We are developing a series of
microbial tools in Galaxy (including our VelvetOptimiser etc) and BreSeq is
looking like a good candidate to fill the variant calling role. These tools are
for a national Australian project which we are part of, of which all will be
freely available and include step by step instructions for beginners. But we
need .VCF to integrate with the rest of Galaxy. PS. I agree VCF is a bit of a
pain, especially needing context bases for indels! (makes it harder to write GD
-> VCF wrapper)
Original comment by torsten....@gmail.com
on 25 Dec 2012 at 9:03
GD-format puts some thought into the results being human-readable, while VCF
makes you do some thinking. If you look into the evidence output in GD-format
you'll see that it's not far off from VCF.
What microbes are being studied and what types of structural variants are you
hoping to predict with Breseq?
Original comment by Geoffrey...@gmail.com
on 27 Dec 2012 at 4:40
We should have a way to at least convert our genome diffs fully to VCF format,
especially now that VCF 4.0 now has some ways of putting structural variants in
http://www.1000genomes.org/wiki/Analysis/Variant%20Call%20Format/VCF%20(Variant%
20Call%20Format)%20version%204.0/encoding-structural-variants
It still loses the evidence to mutation mapping... and the idea of mutations
that can be applied as events, rather than that we are counting variants. So,
some further thought is required.
Original comment by jeffrey....@gmail.com
on 11 Jul 2013 at 9:26
There is basic VCF output available now via the "gdtools GD2VCF" conversion now
in v0.24*
Original comment by jeffrey....@gmail.com
on 8 Aug 2014 at 9:38
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
Geoffrey...@gmail.com
on 12 Sep 2012 at 2:29