Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Benchmarking long-read aligners and SV callers for structural variation detection in Oxford nanopore sequencing data
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Benchmarking long-read aligners and SV callers for structural variation detection in Oxford nanopore sequencing data
Do you wish to request the book?
Benchmarking long-read aligners and SV callers for structural variation detection in Oxford nanopore sequencing data
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Benchmarking long-read aligners and SV callers for structural variation detection in Oxford nanopore sequencing data
2024
Overview
Structural variants (SVs) are one of the significant types of DNA mutations and are typically defined as larger-than-50-bp genomic alterations that include insertions, deletions, duplications, inversions, and translocations. These modifications can profoundly impact the phenotypic characteristics and contribute to disorders like cancer, response to treatment, and infections. Four long-read aligners and five SV callers have been evaluated using three Oxford Nanopore NGS human genome datasets in terms of precision, recall, and F1-score statistical metrics, depth of coverage, and speed of analysis. The best SV caller regarding recall, precision, and F1-score when matched with different aligners at different coverage levels tend to vary depending on the dataset and the specific SV types being analyzed. However, based on our findings, Sniffles and CuteSV tend to perform well across different aligners and coverage levels, followed by SVIM, PBSV, and SVDSS in the last place. The CuteSV caller has the highest average F1-score (82.51%) and recall (78.50%), and Sniffles has the highest average precision value (94.33%). Minimap2 as an aligner and Sniffles as an SV caller act as a strong base for the pipeline of SV calling because of their high speed and reasonable accomplishment. PBSV has a lower average F1-score, precision, and recall and may generate more false positives and overlook some actual SVs. Our results are valuable in the comprehensive evaluation of popular SV callers and aligners as they provide insight into the performance of several long-read aligners and SV callers and serve as a reference for researchers in selecting the most suitable tools for SV detection.
Publisher
Nature Publishing Group UK,Nature Publishing Group,Nature Portfolio
