DeNovoGear: de novo indel and point mutation discovery and phasing (original) (raw)

Nature Methods volume 10, pages 985–987 (2013) Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

We present DeNovoGear software for analyzing de novo mutations from familial and somatic tissue sequencing data. DeNovoGear uses likelihood-based error modeling to reduce the false positive rate of mutation discovery in exome analysis and fragment information to identify the parental origin of germ-line mutations. We used DeNovoGear on human whole-genome sequencing data to produce a set of predicted de novo insertion and/or deletion (indel) mutations with a 95% validation rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 print issues and online access

$259.00 per year

only $21.58 per issue

Buy this article

USD 39.95

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Additional access options:

Figure 1: Using beta-binomial likelihoods to model exome data.

The alternative text for this image may have been generated using AI.

Similar content being viewed by others

Accession codes

Accessions

Sequence Read Archive

References

  1. Conrad, D.F. et al. Nat. Genet. 43, 712–714 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  2. Roach, J.C. et al. Science 328, 636–639 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  3. Kong, A. et al. Nature 488, 471–475 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  4. Cartwright, R.A., Hussin, J., Keebler, J.E., Stone, E.A. & Awadalla, P. Stat. Appl. Genet. Mol. Biol. 11, pii (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
  5. Abecasis, G.R. et al. Nature 491, 56–65 (2012).
    Article Google Scholar
  6. Heinrich, V. et al. Nucleic Acids Res. 40, 2426–2431 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  7. DePristo, M.A. et al. Nat. Genet. 43, 491–498 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  8. Li, H. Bioinformatics 27, 2987–2993 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  9. Li, B. et al. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002944 (2012).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  10. Albers, C.A. et al. Genome Res. 21, 961–973 (2011).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  11. Lynch, M. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 961–968 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  12. Lunter, G. Bioinformatics 23, i289–i296 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  13. Lynch, M. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 105, 9272–9277 (2008).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  14. Kvikstad, E.M., Tyekucheva, S., Chiaromonte, F. & Makova, K.D. PLoS Comput. Biol. 3, 1772–1782 (2007).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  15. Benson, G. Nucleic Acids Res. 27, 573–580 (1999).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  16. Smith, D.M. Appl. Stat. 32, 196–204 (1983).
    Article Google Scholar
  17. Watterson, G.A. Theor. Popul. Biol. 7, 256–276 (1975).
    Article CAS Google Scholar
  18. Conrad, D. et al. Nature 464, 704–712 (2010).
    Article CAS Google Scholar

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank R. Hardwick for assistance with primer design, V. Plagnol and H. Li for helpful discussion, and members of the 1000 Genomes community for generating software, data and resources that we used as part of this project. This research was supported in part by Wellcome Trust grant WT098051.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Avinash Ramu and Michiel J Noordam: These authors contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Genetics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Avinash Ramu, Michiel J Noordam & Donald F Conrad
  2. Center for Evolutionary Medicine and Informatics, The Biodesign Institute, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
    Rachel S Schwartz & Reed A Cartwright
  3. Genome Mutation and Genetic Disease Group, Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Cambridge, UK
    Arthur Wuster & Matthew E Hurles
  4. School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA
    Reed A Cartwright
  5. Department of Pathology & Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri, USA
    Donald F Conrad

Authors

  1. Avinash Ramu
  2. Michiel J Noordam
  3. Rachel S Schwartz
  4. Arthur Wuster
  5. Matthew E Hurles
  6. Reed A Cartwright
  7. Donald F Conrad

Contributions

A.R. implemented methods, analyzed data and wrote the paper; M.J.N. performed validation experiments, analyzed data and wrote the paper; R.S.S. performed simulations; A.W. provided code and performed early analysis demonstrating the utility of beta-binomials; M.E.H. and R.A.C. gave conceptual advice, supervised the project and wrote the paper; D.F.C. designed and supervised the project, implemented methods, analyzed data and wrote the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence toDonald F Conrad.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Supplementary information

Source data

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ramu, A., Noordam, M., Schwartz, R. et al. DeNovoGear: de novo indel and point mutation discovery and phasing.Nat Methods 10, 985–987 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nmeth.2611

Download citation

This article is cited by