We first operate a rapid inspection of the different BAM files using samtools flagstat. Illumina provided chr21 read mapping obtained with their GA IIx deep sequencing platform <ftp://webdata:webdata@ussd-ftp.illumina.com/Data/SequencingRuns/NA18507_GAIIx_100_chr21.bam>, aligned to the b36/hg18 reference genome)

Address of the bookmark: https://wiki.bits.vib.be/index.php/NGS_Exercise.6#compare_aln_.26_mem_results_with_vcf-compare

Address of the bookmark: https://peerj.com/preprints/453.pdf

Please report new whole genome alignment tools under comment sections.

Address of the bookmark: http://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~brudno/721.full.pdf

Address of the bookmark: https://github.com/combogenomics/medusa

Further information about LACHESIS, including source code, documentation and a user's guide are available at: http://shendurelab.github.io/LACHESIS.

Manuscript describing LACHESIS was published as: Burton JN#, Adey A, Patwardhan RP, Qiu R, Kitzman JO, Shendure J#. Chromosome-scale scaffolding of de novo genome assemblies based on chromatin interactions. Nature Biotechnology 2013 Dec;31(12):1119-25. doi: 10.1038/nbt.272. PubMed PMID: 24185095.

http://shendurelab.github.io/LACHESIS/

Address of the bookmark: http://shendurelab.github.io/LACHESIS/

The data are available using NCBI accession IDs: BioProject: (PRJNA483067), assembly: [RBJD00000000] and sequence data (SRP155659).

Additional Resources

• Interactive map showcasing global initiatives underway to generate reference-quality human genome assemblies for diverse populations
• BioReport Podcast on the value of ethnic-specific reference genomes
• Nature Reviews Genetics paper from NHGRI: Prioritizing diversity in human genomics research
• Article in The Journal of Precision Medicine: “Minority Report – Ethnic Diversity and the Real Promise for Precision Medicine”
• Article in Bio-IT World: “Genomic Data Standards Are a Necessity”
• NHGRI Project Award: High Quality Human and Non-Human Primate Genome Assemblies

More details are available on the PacBio website:

• Blog post: Data Release: Highest-Quality, Most Contiguous Individual Human Genome Assembly to Date
• Blog post: For Reference-Grade Human Genome Assemblies, SMRT Sequencing Yields Optimal Results
• Webinar:  Assembling High-Quality Human Reference Genomes for Global Populations
• FALCON-Phase press release and article preprint
• PacBio research focus webpage about Human Population Genetics

 Ref: https://stockguru.com/2018/10/08/pacific-biosciences-releases-highest-quality-most-contiguous-individual-human-genome-assembly-to-date/

We accomplish this by first calculating genotype likelihoods for every site. For a given site in a diploid genome, there are 10 possible genotypes (AA, AC, AG, AT, CC, CG, CT, GG, GT, TT). Referee takes as input the genotype likelihoods calculated for all 10 genotypes given the called reference base at each position.

Referee is a program to calculate a quality score for every position in a genome assembly. This allows for easy filtering of low quality sites for any downstream analysis.

https://github.com/gwct/referee

Address of the bookmark: https://gwct.github.io/referee/#

A recent study published in Genome Biology (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13059-026-04280-y) addressed this challenge by introducing dicast (https://github.com/burgshrimps/dicast), a machine-learning approach for detecting structural variants in short-read sequencing data. Structural variants, such as large deletions, insertions, duplications, and inversions, can have significant biological and clinical implications, yet they are challenging to identify with short-read technologies. Because different detection methods frequently yield divergent results, researchers commonly employ consensus calling, considering a variant valid only if multiple tools detect it. While this approach reduces false positives, it relies on the potentially flawed assumption that the majority is always correct.

The researchers explored the impact of evaluating the supporting evidence for each variant, rather than simply tallying the number of algorithms that identified it. To establish a ground truth, they analyzed nine genomes using multiple sequencing technologies and 15 detection methods, initially identifying approximately 35 million potential variants. Through extensive filtering, evidence integration, and manual review of over 11,500 variants, they developed a robust benchmark comprising more than 236,000 structural variants. The findings underscored the complexity of the problem: short-read methods detected fewer than half of deletions and less than 10 percent of insertions, with performance declining markedly in repetitive genomic regions. In contrast, long-read technologies demonstrated superior detection capabilities. However, replacing the substantial volume of existing short-read data in clinical and research settings is not immediately feasible. Consequently, the researchers questioned whether short-read data might harbor more information than conventional analytical pipelines currently extract.

This line of inquiry led to the development of dicast. Rather than merely confirming agreement among multiple tools, dicast identifies patterns in sequencing data, including split and clipped reads, discordant read pairs, alignment characteristics, and the surrounding genomic context. An XGBoost machine-learning model evaluates which combinations of these signals are indicative of genuine structural variants. Thus, the approach shifts from tallying algorithmic consensus to interpreting the underlying evidence.

The researchers subsequently conducted a targeted evaluation by examining structural variants detected by only a single short-read tool, which are typically missed by consensus-based approaches. dicast successfully recovered approximately 81% of these single-caller deletions, insertions, and duplications. The signals for these variants were present in the data, but conventional filtering methods failed to integrate them effectively.

The utility of dicast was further demonstrated in cohorts with rare diseases, including congenital limb malformations, atrial fibrillation, and neuromuscular disorders. In one instance, dicast achieved a deletion recall rate of approximately 0.96, compared to 0.74 using consensus calling. The median number of variants requiring manual review was 29 per sample. Among 31 experimentally validated variants that standard filters would have missed, dicast identified 12, whereas consensus calling detected only one.

Overall, dicast identified approximately 20 percent more potential disease-causing deletions than consensus-based methods. While a 20 percent increase may appear modest, in clinical genomics such improvements can have significant practical implications. Missing a deletion may leave a case unresolved, whereas detecting a structural variant can provide critical diagnostic insights.

The study does not claim that machine learning has rendered short-read sequencing superior to long-read approaches. Instead, the results underscore the effectiveness of long-read sequencing for structural variant detection. However, dicast highlights a more nuanced perspective: substantial biological information may still be recoverable from the extensive short-read datasets already available.

The principal lesson extends beyond the detection of structural variants. For many years, bioinformatics pipelines have relied on threshold-based criteria, such as minimum coverage, quality scores, or support from multiple tools. While these rules are useful, biological phenomena do not always conform to rigid checklists; multiple weak signals, when considered collectively, can provide compelling evidence.

This perspective prompts consideration of the solitary variant: one algorithm identifies it, while several others do not. Traditional consensus techniques might have dismissed it, yet machine learning approaches evaluate the available evidence to determine whether the variant is plausible.

Occasionally, the most significant variant within a genome is the one that is almost universally overlooked.

Read more at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s13059-026-04280-y

Main research topics:
- Comparative and Population Genomics of Plant Symbionts
- Parasite Genome Evolution
- Experimental Evolution of Microbial Symbionts and Parasites
- Phylogenomics of Early Branching Fungi

More at http://corradilab.weebly.com/

Staff Scientists

Specialization: Applicant should have a Ph.D. with excellent academic credentials along with the track record of scientific productivity evidenced by publications/patents/products in the frontier areas of Plant Biology such as, Computational Biology, Genome Analysis and Molecular Mapping, Molecular Mechanism of Abiotic Stress Responses, Nutritional Genomics, Plant Development and Architecture, Plant Immunity, Molecular Breeding, Transgenics for crop improvement and other emerging areas based on plant genomics.

Remuneration: The length of experience and scientific accomplishments/quality of scientific productivity record will be major factors in deciding the level of appointment as Staff Scientist as well as starting salary in the Pay Bands of Rs 15,600-39,100 (with grade pay of 5400), and Rs 37,400-67,000 (with grade pay of 8,700 and 8,900) plus usual allowances admissible to the Central Government employees. However, NIPGR reserves the right to select candidates in the lower grade against the foregoing posts depending upon the qualifications and experience of the candidate. Reservation of posts shall be as per Govt. of India norms. Five posts (SC-2, ST-1, OBC-2) in the Pay Band of Rs 15,600-39,100 with Grade Pay of Rs 5400, are reserved.

More at http://www.nipgr.res.in/careers/vacancies_latest.php#

Apply online at http://www.nipgr.res.in/nipgr_recu/nipgr_recu.php

Form http://www.nipgr.res.in/files/careers/Application_Performa_2015.doc