Dataset Information

Comparison of Genotype Imputation for SNP Array and Low-Coverage Whole-Genome Sequencing Data.

ABSTRACT: Genotype imputation is the term used to describe the process of inferring unobserved genotypes in a sample of individuals. It is a key step prior to a genome-wide association study (GWAS) or genomic prediction. The imputation accuracy will directly influence the results from subsequent analyses. In this simulation-based study, we investigate the accuracy of genotype imputation in relation to some factors characterizing SNP chip or low-coverage whole-genome sequencing (LCWGS) data. The factors included the imputation reference population size, the proportion of target markers /SNP density, the genetic relationship (distance) between the target population and the reference population, and the imputation method. Simulations of genotypes were based on coalescence theory accounting for the demographic history of pigs. A population of simulated founders diverged to produce four separate but related populations of descendants. The genomic data of 20,000 individuals were simulated for a 10-Mb chromosome fragment. Our results showed that the proportion of target markers or SNP density was the most critical factor affecting imputation accuracy under all imputation situations. Compared with Minimac4, Beagle5.1 reproduced higher-accuracy imputed data in most cases, more notably when imputing from the LCWGS data. Compared with SNP chip data, LCWGS provided more accurate genotype imputation. Our findings provided a relatively comprehensive insight into the accuracy of genotype imputation in a realistic population of domestic animals.

SUBMITTER: Deng T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8762119 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND: Many Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) calling programs have been developed to identify Single Nucleotide Variations (SNVs) in next-generation sequencing (NGS) data. However, low sequencing coverage presents challenges to accurate SNV identification, especially in single-sample data. Moreover, commonly used SNP calling programs usually include several metrics in their output files for each potential SNP. These metrics are highly correlated in complex patterns, making it extremely difficult to select SNPs for further experimental validations. RESULTS: To explore solutions to the above challenges, we compare the performance of four SNP calling algorithm, SOAPsnp, Atlas-SNP2, SAMtools, and GATK, in a low-coverage single-sample sequencing dataset. Without any post-output filtering, SOAPsnp calls more SNVs than the other programs since it has fewer internal filtering criteria. Atlas-SNP2 has stringent internal filtering criteria; thus it reports the least number of SNVs. The numbers of SNVs called by GATK and SAMtools fall between SOAPsnp and Atlas-SNP2. Moreover, we explore the values of key metrics related to SNVs' quality in each algorithm and use them as post-output filtering criteria to filter out low quality SNVs. Under different coverage cutoff values, we compare four algorithms and calculate the empirical positive calling rate and sensitivity. Our results show that: 1) the overall agreement of the four calling algorithms is low, especially in non-dbSNPs; 2) the agreement of the four algorithms is similar when using different coverage cutoffs, except that the non-dbSNPs agreement level tends to increase slightly with increasing coverage; 3) SOAPsnp, SAMtools, and GATK have a higher empirical calling rate for dbSNPs compared to non-dbSNPs; and 4) overall, GATK and Atlas-SNP2 have a relatively higher positive calling rate and sensitivity, but GATK calls more SNVs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that the agreement between different calling algorithms is relatively low. Thus, more caution should be used in choosing algorithms, setting filtering parameters, and designing validation studies. For reliable SNV calling results, we recommend that users employ more than one algorithm and use metrics related to calling quality and coverage as filtering criteria.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Genotype Imputation for SNP Array and Low-Coverage Whole-Genome Sequencing Data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets