Provided by: pbgenomicconsensus_2.0.0+20151210-1_all 
NAME
quiver-faq - frequently asked questions regarding the quiver genomic consensus caller
QUESTIONS
What are EviCons? GenomicConsensus? Quiver? Plurality?
GenomicConsensus is the current PacBio consensus and variant calling suite. It contains a main program,
variantCaller.py, which provides two consensus / variant calling algorithms: Plurality and Quiver. These
algorithms can be run by calling variantCaller.py --algorithm=[quiver|plurality] or by going through the
convenience wrapper scripes quiver and plurality.
EviCons was the previous generation PacBio variant caller (removed in software release v1.3.1).
A separate package called ConsensusCore is a C++ library where all the computation behind Quiver is done
(and is transparent to the user after installation).
What is Plurality?
Plurality is a very simple variant calling algorithm: it stacks up the aligned reads (alignment as
produced by BLASR, or alternate mapping tool), and for each column under a reference base, calls the most
abundant (i.e., the plurality) read base (or bases, or deletion) as the consensus at that reference
position.
Why is Plurality a weak algorithm?
Plurality does not perform any local realignment. This means it is heavily biased by the alignment
produced by the mapper (BLASR, typically). It also means that it is insensitive at detecting indels.
Consider this example:
Reference AAAA
----
Aligned A-AA
reads AA-A
-AAA
----
Plurality AAAA
consensus
Note here that every read has a deletion and the correct consensus call would be "AAA", but due to the
mapper's freedom in gap-placement at the single-read level, the plurality sequence is "AAAA"---so the
deletion is missed. Local realignment, which plurality does not do, but which could be considered as
implicit in the Quiver algorithm, essentially pushes the gaps here to the same column, thus identifying
the deletion. While plurality could be adjusted to use a simple "gap normalizing" realignment, in
practice noncognate extras (spurious non-homopolymer base calls) in the midst of homopolymer runs pose
challenges.
What is Quiver?
Quiver is a more sophisticated algorithm that finds the maximum likelihood template sequence given PacBio
reads of the template. PacBio reads are modeled using a conditional random field approach that
prescribes a probability to a read given a template sequence. In addition to the base sequence of each
read, Quiver uses several additional QV covariates that the basecaller provides. Using these covariates
provides additional information about each read, allowing more accurate consensus calls.
Quiver does not use the alignment provided by the mapper (BLASR, typically), except for determining how
to group reads together at a macro level. It implicitly performs its own realignment, so it is highly
sensitive to all variant types, including indels---for example, it resolves the example above with ease.
The name Quiver reflects a consensus-calling algorithm that is QV-aware.
What does Quiver put in its output files?
There are three output files from Quiver:
• A consensus FASTA file containing the consensus sequence
• A consensus FASTQ file containing the consensus sequence with quality annotations
• A variants GFF file containing a filtered, annotated list of variants identified
It is important to note that the variants included in the output variants GFF file are filtered by
coverage and quality, so not all variants that are apparent in comparing the reference to the consensus
FASTA output will correspond to variants in the output variants GFF file.
To enable all output files, the following can be run (for example):
% quiver -j16 aligned_reads.cmp.h5 -r ref.fa
-o consensus.fa -o consensus.fq -o
variants.gff
The extension is used to determine the output file format.
What does it mean that Quiver's consensus is de novo?
Quiver's consensus is de novo in the sense that the reference and the reference alignment are not used to
inform the consensus output. Only the reads factor into the determination of the consensus.
The only time the reference sequence is used to make consensus calls - when the --noEvidenceConsensusCall
flag is set to reference or lowercasereference (the default)- is when there is no effective coverage in a
genomic window, so Quiver has no evidence for computing consensus. One can set
--noEvidenceConsensusCall=nocall to avoid using the reference even in zero coverage regions.
What is Quiver's accuracy?
Quiver's expected accuracy is a function of coverage and chemistry. The C2 chemistry (no longer
available), P6-C4 and P4-C2 chemistries provide the most accuracy. Nominal consensus accuracy levels are
as follows:
┌──────────────────┬─────────────────────────────┬───────┐
│ Coverage │ Expected consensus accuracy │ │
├──────────────────┼─────────────────────────────┼───────┤
│ C2, P4-C2, P6-C4 │ P5-C3 │ │
├──────────────────┼─────────────────────────────┼───────┤
│ 10x │ > Q30 │ > Q30 │
├──────────────────┼─────────────────────────────┼───────┤
│ 20x │ > Q40 │ > Q40 │
├──────────────────┼─────────────────────────────┼───────┤
│ 40x │ > Q50 │ > Q45 │
├──────────────────┼─────────────────────────────┼───────┤
│ 60-80x │ ~ Q60 │ > Q55 │
└──────────────────┴─────────────────────────────┴───────┘
The "Q" values referred to are Phred-scaled quality values:
q = -10 \log_{10} p_{error}
for instance, Q50 corresponds to a p_error of 0.00001---an accuracy of 99.999%. These accuracy
expectations are based on routine validations performed on multiple bacterial genomes before each
chemistry release.
What are the residual errors after applying Quiver?
If there are errors remaining applying Quiver, they will almost invariably be homopolymer run-length
errors (insertions or deletions).
Does Quiver need to know what sequencing chemistry was used?
At present, the Quiver model is trained per-chemistry, so it is very important that Quiver knows the
sequencing chemistries used.
If SMRT Analysis software was used to build the cmp.h5 file, the cmp.h5 will be loaded with information
about the sequencing chemistry used for each SMRT Cell, and Quiver will automatically identify the right
parameters to use.
If custom software was used to build the cmp.h5, or an override of Quiver's autodetection is desired,
then the chemistry or model must be explicity entered. For example:
% quiver -p P4-C2 ...
% quiver -p P4-C2.AllQVsMergingByChannelModel ...
Can a mix of chemistries be used in a cmp.h5 file for Quiver?
Yes! Quiver automatically sees the chemistry per-SMRT Cell, so it can figure out the right parameters
for each read and model them appropriately.
Chemistry mixtures of P6-C4, P4-C2, P5-C3, and C2 are supported. If other chemistries are mixed in a
cmp.h5, Quiver will give undefined results. However, Quiver can still be used on any cmp.h5 file
containing sequencing reads from a single chemistry.
What are the QVs that Quiver uses?
Quiver uses additional QV tracks provided by the basecaller. These QVs may be looked at as little
breadcrumbs that are left behind by the basecaller to help identify positions where it was likely that
errors of a given type occurred. Formally, the QVs for a given read are vectors of the same length as
the number of bases called; the QVs used are as follows:
• DeletionQV
• InsertionQV
• MergeQV
• SubstitutionQV
• DeletionTag
To find out if your cmp.h5 file is loaded with these QV tracks, run the command
% h5ls -rv aligned_reads.cmp.h5
and look for the QV track names in the output. If your cmp.h5 file is lacking some of these tracks,
Quiver will still run, though it will issue a warning that its performance will be suboptimal.
Why is Quiver making errors in some region?
The most likely cause for true errors made by Quiver is that the coverage in the region was low. If
there is 5x coverage over a 1000-base region, then 10 errors in that region can be expected.
It is important to understand that the effective coverage available to Quiver is not the full coverage
apparent in plots---Quiver and Plurality both filter out ambiguously mapped reads by default. The
remaining coverage after filtering is called the /effective coverage/. See the next section for
discussion of MapQV.
If you have verified that there is high effective coverage in the region in question, it is highly
possible---given the high accuracy Quiver can achieve---that the apparent errors actually reflect true
sequence variants. Inspect the FASTQ output file to ensure that the region was called at high
confidence; if an erroneous sequence variant is being called at high confidence, please report a bug to
us.
What does Quiver do for genomic regions with no effective coverage?
For regions with no effective coverage, no variants are outputted, and the FASTQ confidence is 0.
The output in the FASTA and FASTQ consensus sequence tracks is dependent on the setting of the
--noEvidenceConsensusCall flag. Assuming the reference in the window is "ACGT", the options are:
┌───────────────────────────────────────┬──────────────────┐
│ --noEvidenceConsensusCall=... │ Consensus output │
├───────────────────────────────────────┼──────────────────┤
│ nocall (default in 1.4) │ NNNN │
├───────────────────────────────────────┼──────────────────┤
│ reference │ ACGT │
├───────────────────────────────────────┼──────────────────┤
│ lowercasereference (new post 1.4, and │ acgt │
│ the default) │ │
└───────────────────────────────────────┴──────────────────┘
What is MapQV and why is it important?
MapQV is a single scalar Phred-scaled QV per aligned read that reflects the mapper's degree of certainty
that the read aligned to this part of the reference and not some other. Unambigously mapped reads will
have a high MapQV (typically 255), while a read that was equally likely to have come from two parts of
the reference would have a MapQV of 3.
MapQV is pretty important when you want highly accurate variant calls. Quiver and Plurality both filter
out aligned reads with a MapQV below 20 (by default), so as not to call a variant using data of uncertain
genomic origin.
This can be problematic if using Quiver to get a consensus sequence. If the genome of interest contains
long (relative to the library insert size) highly-similar repeats, the effective coverage (after MapQV
filtering) may be reduced in the repeat regions---this is termed these MapQV dropouts. If the coverage
is sufficiently reduced in these regions, Quiver will not call consensus in these regions---see What does
Quiver do for genomic regions with no effective coverage?.
If you want to use ambiguously mapped reads in computing a consensus for a denovo assembly, the MapQV
filter can be turned off entirely. In this case, the consensus for each instance of a genomic repeat
will be calculated using reads that may actually be from other instances of the repeat, so the exact
trustworthiness of the consensus in that region may be suspect. The next section describes how to
disable the MapQV filter.
How can the MapQV filter be turned off and when should it be?
The MapQV filter can be disabled using the flag --mapQvThreshold=0 (shorthand: -m=0). If running a
Quiver job via SMRT Portal, this can be done by unchecking the "Use only unambiguously mapped reads"
option. Consider this in de novo assembly projects, but it is not recommended for variant calling
applications.
How can variant calls made by Quiver be inspected or validated?
When in doubt, it is easiest to inspect the region in a tool like SMRT View, which enables you to view
the reads aligned to the region. Deletions and substitutions should be fairly easy to spot; to view
insertions, right-click on the reference base and select "View Insertions Before...".
What are the filtering parameters that Quiver uses?
Quiver limits read coverage, filters reads by MapQV, and filters variants by quality and coverage.
• The overall read coverage used to call consensus in every window is 100x by default, but can be changed
using -X=value.
• The MapQV filter, by default, removes reads with MapQV < 20. This is configured using
--mapQvThreshold=value / -m=value
• Variants are only called if the read coverage of the site exceeds 5x, by default---this is configurable
using -x=value. Further, they will not be called if the confidence (Phred-scaled) does not exceed
40---configurable using -q=value.
What happens when the sample is a mixture, or diploid?
At present, Quiver assumes a haploid sample, and the behavior of Quiver on sample mixtures or
diploid/polyploid samples is undefined. The program will not crash, but the output results are not
guaranteed to accord with any one of the haplotypes in the sample, as opposed to a potential patchwork.
Why would I want to iterate the mapping+Quiver process?
Some customers using Quiver for polishing highly repetitive genomes have found that if they take the
consensus FASTA output of Quiver, use it as a new reference, and then perform mapping and Quiver again to
get a new consensus, they get improved results from the second round of Quiver.
This can be explained by noting that the output of the first round of Quiver is more accurate than the
initial draft consensus output by the assembler, so the second round's mapping to the Quiver consensus
can be more sensitive in mapping reads from repetitive regions. This can then result in improved
consensus in those repetitive regions, because the reads have been assigned more correctly to their true
genomic loci. However there is also a possibility that the potential shifting of reads around from one
rounds' mapping to the next might alter borderline (low confidence) consensus calls even away from
repetitive regions.
We recommend the (mapping+Quiver) iteration for customers polishing repetitive genomes, and it could also
prove useful for resequencing applications. However we caution that this is very much an exploratory
procedure and we make no guarantees about its performance. In particular, borderline consensus calls can
change when the procedure is iterated, and the procedure is not guaranteed to be convergent.
Is iterating the (mapping+Quiver) process a convergent procedure?
We have seen many examples where (mapping+Quiver), repeated many times, is evidently not a convergent
procedure. For example, a variant call may be present in iteration n, absent in n+1, and then present
again in n+2. It is possible for subtle changes in mapping to change the set of reads examined upon
inspecting a genomic window, and therefore result in a different consensus sequence there. We expect
this to be the case primarily for "borderline" (low confidence) base calls.
SEE ALSO
quiver(1) plurality(1) variantCaller(1) pbgff(5)
1.0.0 October 2015 QUIVER-FAQ(7)