This is a test version of Biostars. For the public version, visit https://www.biostars.org.
Mauve alignment vs samtools for SNP calling

If I have two assembled genomes (one reference), what is the difference between doing SNP calling using something like Samtools from the raw Illumina reads and doing a Mauve alignment after assembly of each genome? Would Samtools be much more accurate? It seems easier to just do a Mauve alignment and extract the SNPs since I've already done the assemblies but maybe this is oversimplifying it. These are bacterial genomes if that matters.

samtools snp mauve alignment snp calling
• 3,343 views • link
updated by Kausik • Kausik • written by gabriel.jabud • gabriel.jabud

1 answer

You should use the reads and samtools if you have them. Part of identifying SNPs etc is determining how well they're supported (i.e. are they real or sequencing errors for instance). If you aligned 2 genomes with mauve, firstly it will be horribly inaccurate as you say, but also you'll have no information about whether that SNP is supported in most or all of the reads covering that position.

• 0 views • link
written by Joe Joe

Is it better to use assembled genome if the assembly is completed using nanopore reads (~100x coverage) and polished using short reads for calling SNPs and structural variants?

• 0 views • link
written by rthapa • rthapa

Better than what alternative?

• 0 views • link
written by Joe Joe

Better than using map based based tool?

• 0 views • link
written by rthapa • rthapa

I'm not really sure what you are asking, but yes, a nanopore assembly polished with short reads is the best to have SNPs called against.

You can map the short reads back against the hybrid assembly to get your SNPs and SVs.

• 0 views • link
written by Joe Joe

Thank you. I am planning to compare the hybrid assembly to reference genome to call the SNPs and SV.

• 0 views • link
written by rthapa • rthapa

Log in to answer this question.

More posts like this