Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Tradeoffs in alignment and assembly-based methods for structural variant detection with long-read sequencing data.
Liu, Yichen Henry; Luo, Can; Golding, Staunton G; Ioffe, Jacob B; Zhou, Xin Maizie.
Affiliation
  • Liu YH; Department of Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, 37235, Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Luo C; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, 37235, Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Golding SG; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, 37235, Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Ioffe JB; Department of Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, 37235, Nashville, TN, USA.
  • Zhou XM; Department of Computer Science, Vanderbilt University, 37235, Nashville, TN, USA. maizie.zhou@vanderbilt.edu.
Nat Commun ; 15(1): 2447, 2024 Mar 19.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38503752
ABSTRACT
Long-read sequencing offers long contiguous DNA fragments, facilitating diploid genome assembly and structural variant (SV) detection. Efficient and robust algorithms for SV identification are crucial with increasing data availability. Alignment-based methods, favored for their computational efficiency and lower coverage requirements, are prominent. Alternative approaches, relying solely on available reads for de novo genome assembly and employing assembly-based tools for SV detection via comparison to a reference genome, demand significantly more computational resources. However, the lack of comprehensive benchmarking constrains our comprehension and hampers further algorithm development. Here we systematically compare 14 read alignment-based SV calling methods (including 4 deep learning-based methods and 1 hybrid method), and 4 assembly-based SV calling methods, alongside 4 upstream aligners and 7 assemblers. Assembly-based tools excel in detecting large SVs, especially insertions, and exhibit robustness to evaluation parameter changes and coverage fluctuations. Conversely, alignment-based tools demonstrate superior genotyping accuracy at low sequencing coverage (5-10×) and excel in detecting complex SVs, like translocations, inversions, and duplications. Our evaluation provides performance insights, highlighting the absence of a universally superior tool. We furnish guidelines across 31 criteria combinations, aiding users in selecting the most suitable tools for diverse scenarios and offering directions for further method development.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Algorithms / Genome, Human Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Nat Commun Journal subject: BIOLOGIA / CIENCIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Reino Unido

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Algorithms / Genome, Human Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Nat Commun Journal subject: BIOLOGIA / CIENCIA Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos Country of publication: Reino Unido