-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
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
Defaulted to excluding duplicate and QC failing reads from pileup. #42
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
I ran the new version against the example data sent internally. Lines output:
When I took a look at what the differences were, I noticed the read support reported appears to include the duplicate reads. In one example, the hard-filtered version reported 37 total reads and the soft-marked 129. If the user wants to exclude duplicates, then only the unmarked reads should be counted. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Read support reporting shouldn't count the duplicate-marked reads.
I'm also surprised that the number of pileups changes when duplicate reads are excluded - given that pileups are reported with any number of supporting reads, I would expect the number of pileups to be constant while the number of supporting reads per pileup may decrease |
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ title: fgsv tools | |||
|
|||
# fgsv tools | |||
|
|||
The following tools are available in fgsv version 0.2.0-d603e95. | |||
The following tools are available in fgsv version 0.2.0-5ce8bc6. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you please bump the major version, as excluding duplicates (and qc fails) by default willl be a breaking change?
No description provided.