I have 30x WGS human samples and want to estimate contamination using the GATK tools to crosscheck another software that I am using to estimate contamination, this is what I have done:
gatk GetPileupSummaries \
-I my_sample.cram \
-V small_exac_common_3.hg38.vcf.gz \
-L small_exac_common_3.hg38.vcf.gz \
-O my_sample.getpileups.table \
--reference hs38DH.fa
gatk CalculateContamination \
-I my_sample.getpileups.table \
-O my_sample.contamination.table
where small_exac_common_3.hg38.vcf.gz was gotten from gs://gatk-best-practices/somatic-hg38/small_exac_common_3.hg38.vcf.gz
My main questions are:
1. Is this an appropriate contam estimation workflow for germline human WGS?
2. If so, is small_exac_common_3.hg38.vcf.gz a reasonable file to pass for the -V and -L arguments?
3. from my_sample.contamination.table I get columns "sample", "contamination", "error". If the value of "contamination" is 0.01, does this mean the sample is contaminated 1%?
1 answer
Yes, this is an appropriate workflow for estimating contamination in germline human WGS (it's the standard GATK method, though originally somatic-focused; it works well for diploid samples by modeling allelic fraction deviations at common SNPs).
Yes, small_exac_common_3.hg38.vcf.gz is the exact resource recommended by GATK for -V and -L (it's a subset of ~10k high-confidence ExAC common variants optimized for this).
And yes, a contamination value of 0.01 indicates ~1% contamination (it's the estimated fraction of reads from cross-sample admixture). For cross-checking, I'd suggest also running VerifyBamID (non-GATK alternative) if you want an orthogonal method.
Kind regards,
Kevin
Log in to answer this question.