Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

RCRS vs RSRS output #90

Open
sremuk opened this issue Jan 28, 2020 · 2 comments
Open

RCRS vs RSRS output #90

sremuk opened this issue Jan 28, 2020 · 2 comments

Comments

@sremuk
Copy link

sremuk commented Jan 28, 2020

When using RCRS vs RSRS for the same file., there is a difference in the output haplogroups. There are much more with RSRS as opposed to RCRS. Is there a big difference in the genome files? Also, there is no vcf output with RCRS settings.

@clody23
Copy link
Member

clody23 commented Jan 28, 2020

Hi,

a difference between RCRS and RSRS-based variant calling is indeed expected. The reason is that RSRS is better suited for haplogroup prediction, being a virtual reference sequence based at the root of the human mitochondrial phylogeny. rCRS instead belongs to haplogroup H2a2a1, which is a modern European haplogroup that shares more common variants with European clades. This might result into a better haplogroup prediction, especially for European samples, where more informative variant alleles are found when using RSRS as reference sequence.
In any case, the presence of more than one haplogroup prediction is indicative of an inadequate number of informative variants available in your variant calling, that leads to multiple (best) haplogroup predictions.

The case you mentioned, with no VCF with rCRS, might indicate that the sample is either identical to H2a2a1 genotype or that something went wrong in the MToolBox run.
Can you please share the log file of the run for us to investigate more?

Thanks
Claudia

@clody23
Copy link
Member

clody23 commented Jan 28, 2020

Also, I would suggest couple of useful readings about rCRS and RSRS differences, most importantly the Behar et al paper from 2012:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3322232/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants