Hello! I am comparing my giraffe mapping result with bwa-mem result (aligned to linear reference). The MAPQ algorithms in two different mapping tools is different or not? Can I use same threshold(such as MAPQ>30) to filter the reads? Or they have different meanings in different mapping tools?
1 answer
vg giraffe does not use the exact same MAPQ algorithm as bwa-mem. However, its mapping qualities are still meant to be Phred-scale probabilities of a read being mapped to the wrong place. (They might not always be well-calibrated probability estimates that truly reflect the probability of a read being mismapped, depending on how good or bad Giraffe is at its job.) So MAPQ > 30 means the same thing for Giraffe and for bwa-mem, but the resulting populations of reads you select with it might still be importantly different.
If you want to compare Giraffe and BWA MAPQ calibration, Supplementary Figure 5 in the Giraffe paper has an evaluation of how well-calibrated Giraffe and BWA MEM mapping qualities are on simulated reads.
Log in to answer this question.
-
Is vg giraffe appropriate for RADseq sequencing reads?
written by RianeZ •
-
Question about vg giraffe, vg surject and Visualization tool for mapping result
written by gulin •
-
How to improve the mapping rate of vg giraffe
written by gulin •
-
Mapping quality in `vg giraffe`
written by Wenhai •
-
Substantial reduction in read mapping following VG surject
written by peterdfields •
-
vg: Mapping fewer reads to a genome graph than a linear reference
written by John Lloyd •
-
Filtering mapping results by percent identity and aligned percent?
written by kmat •
-
BWA mapping parameters for DNA capture sequencing protocol
written by graeme.thorn
-
difference between mapq=0 and samtools flag 0x900
written by bitpir
-
Generating reference from exome sequence data(bam) to map RNA seq(fastq) from the same individual
written by seqlearner •
