Supplementary Information
A practical method to detect SNVs and indels from whole genome and exome sequencing data Daichi Shigemizu1*, Akihiro Fujimoto1*, Shintaro Akiyama1, Tetsuo Abe1, Kaoru Nakano2, Keith A Boroevich1, Yujiro Yamamoto2, Mayuko Furuta2, Michiaki Kubo3, Hidewaki Nakagawa2 and Tatsuhiko Tsunoda1†
1
Laboratory for Medical Science Mathematics, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical
Sciences, Yokohama, Japan. 2
Laboratory for Genome Sequencing Analysis, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical
Sciences, Tokyo, Japan. 3
Laboratory for Genotyping Development, RIKEN Center for Integrative Medical
Sciences, Yokohama, Japan.
*These authors contributed equally to this project and should be considered co-first authors † Correspondence
should be addressed to T.T. (
[email protected])
Supplementary Tables
Supplementary Table S1. Comprison of SNV calling among VCMM, GATK and SAMtools. Number WGS or
Sample
WES
ID
WES
NA12878
NA12891
NA12892
WGS
Ratio (%)
RK001
VCMM
GATK
SAMtools
VCMM
GATK
SAMtools
Concordant
45,641
45,585
44,489
99.28
99.16
96.77
FN
92
137
1,253
0.20
0.30
2.75
FP
239
250
230
0.52
0.55
0.50
Concordant
45,419
45,365
44,085
99.24
99.13
96.33
FN
111
147
1,472
0.28
0.37
3.82
FP
235
253
208
0.60
0.65
0.53
Concordant
38,916
38,888
36,891
99.40
99.33
94.23
FN
56
75
2,107
0.14
0.19
5.38
FP
180
189
154
0.46
0.48
0.39
Concordant
639,462
638,912
636,410
99.64
99.59
98.78
FN
2,031
2,568
5,088
0.17
0.21
0.79
FP
126
139
121
0.015
0.021
0.019
Supplementary Table S2. Comparison of indel calling among VCMM, GATK and SAMtools. WGS or WES
Caller*
Examined
Verified (genotype discordance)
WES
G
1
0 (1)
S
11
0 (4)
V and S
12
9 (1)
V, G and S
37
36
G
1
1
S
4
2 (1)
V and S
2
2
G and S
1
0
V, G and S
14
14
WGS
*: V; VCMM, G; GATK, S; SAMtools