Genomic diversity affects the accuracy of bacterial SNP calling pipelines
David W. Eyre,
Emily L. Clark,
Nicola De Maio,
Liam P. Shaw,
Tim E A Peto,
Derrick W. Crook,
A. Sarah Walker
Posted 31 May 2019
bioRxiv DOI: 10.1101/653774 (published DOI: 10.1093/gigascience/giaa007)
Posted 31 May 2019
Background: Accurately identifying SNPs from bacterial sequencing data is an essential requirement for using genomics to track transmission and predict important phenotypes such as antimicrobial resistance. However, most previous performance evaluations of SNP calling have been restricted to eukaryotic (human) data. Additionally, bacterial SNP calling requires choosing an appropriate reference genome to align reads to, which, together with the bioinformatic pipeline, affects the accuracy and completeness of a set of SNP calls obtained. This study evaluates the performance of 41 SNP calling pipelines using simulated data from 254 strains of 10 clinically common bacteria and real data from environmentally-sourced and genomically diverse isolates within the genera Citrobacter, Enterobacter, Escherichia and Klebsiella. Results: We evaluated the performance of 41 SNP calling pipelines, aligning reads to genomes of the same or a divergent strain. Irrespective of pipeline, a principal determinant of reliable SNP calling was reference genome selection. Across multiple taxa, there was a strong inverse relationship between pipeline sensitivity and precision, and the Mash distance (a proxy for average nucleotide divergence) between reads and reference genome. The effect was especially pronounced for diverse, recombinogenic, bacteria such as Escherichia coli, but less dominant for clonal species such as Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Conclusions: The accuracy of SNP calling for a given species is compromised by increasing intra-species diversity. When reads were aligned to the same genome from which they were sequenced, among the highest performing pipelines was Novoalign/GATK. However, across the full range of (divergent) genomes, among the consistently highest-performing pipelines was Snippy.
- Downloaded 1,839 times
- Download rankings, all-time:
- Site-wide: 4,329 out of 92,091
- In bioinformatics: 791 out of 8,636
- Year to date:
- Site-wide: 6,673 out of 92,091
- Since beginning of last month:
- Site-wide: 12,724 out of 92,091
Downloads over time
Distribution of downloads per paper, site-wide
- 18 Dec 2019: We're pleased to announce PanLingua, a new tool that enables you to search for machine-translated bioRxiv preprints using more than 100 different languages.
- 21 May 2019: PLOS Biology has published a community page about Rxivist.org and its design.
- 10 May 2019: The paper analyzing the Rxivist dataset has been published at eLife.
- 1 Mar 2019: We now have summary statistics about bioRxiv downloads and submissions.
- 8 Feb 2019: Data from Altmetric is now available on the Rxivist details page for every preprint. Look for the "donut" under the download metrics.
- 30 Jan 2019: preLights has featured the Rxivist preprint and written about our findings.
- 22 Jan 2019: Nature just published an article about Rxivist and our data.
- 13 Jan 2019: The Rxivist preprint is live!