You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've been attempting to parse the vcfs generated by the --write-vcf option into R and encountering issues. I believe this has to do with the inconsistency in the number of fields in the FORMAT section.
As you can see BK field is missing and QQ field is in a different location. Additionally, I don't see documentation explaining what a BD ="N" represents.
I first observed this in 0.3.12 but it persists in 0.3.15 as well.
Thanks for any help and insight you can provide.
Rob Eveleigh
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
I've been attempting to parse the vcfs generated by the --write-vcf option into R and encountering issues. I believe this has to do with the inconsistency in the number of fields in the FORMAT section.
e.g. with the CMRG truth set
module load mugqic_dev/python/2.7.13 &&
0.3.15/hap.py
--threads 3 --write-vcf --decompose --preprocess-truth
--engine vcfeval
HG002_GRCh37_CMRG_smallvar_v1.00.vcf.gz
HG002_GRCh37_CMRG_smallvar_v1.00.vcf.gz
-f HG002_GRCh37_CMRG_smallvar_v1.00.bed
-r Homo_sapiens.hs37d5.fa
--engine-vcfeval-template Homo_sapiens.hs37d5.SDF
-o comparisons_0.3.15/HG002-cmrg-happy_0.3.15
This results in variants looking like this:
bcftools query -f '%CHROM\t%POS\t%FORMAT\n' HG002-cmrg-happy_0.3.15.vcf.gz
Problematic calls:
21 47407748 GT:BD:BI:BVT:BLT:QQ 0/1:N:ti:SNP:het:. 0/1:N:ti:SNP:het:0
21 47407754 GT:BD:BI:BVT:BLT:QQ 0/1:N:i1_5:INDEL:het:. 0/1:N:i1_5:INDEL:het:0
Correctly formatted:
21 47408099 GT:BD:BK:QQ:BI:BVT:BLT 1/1:TP:gm:30:tv:SNP:homalt 1/1:TP:gm:30:tv:SNP:homalt
21 47408101 GT:BD:BK:QQ:BI:BVT:BLT 0/1:TP:gm:30:i16_plus:INDEL:het 0/1:TP:gm:30:i16_plus:INDEL:het
As you can see BK field is missing and QQ field is in a different location. Additionally, I don't see documentation explaining what a BD ="N" represents.
I first observed this in 0.3.12 but it persists in 0.3.15 as well.
Thanks for any help and insight you can provide.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: