SNP comparisons

33
SNP comparisons Using positions only • Comparing Watson, Venter, dbSNP Watson more conservative in calls I used Venter method 1 calls (placed unambiguously) • Venter Indels Ensembl made their own SNP calls for Watson and Venter

description

SNP comparisons. Using positions only Comparing Watson, Venter, dbSNP Watson more conservative in calls I used Venter method 1 calls (placed unambiguously) Venter Indels Ensembl made their own SNP calls for Watson and Venter. dbSNP 12,350,000 Venter 3,325,000 Watson 2,060,000. SNPs. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of SNP comparisons

Page 1: SNP comparisons

SNP comparisons

• Using positions only

• Comparing Watson, Venter, dbSNP– Watson more conservative in calls– I used Venter method 1 calls (placed unambiguously)

• Venter Indels• Ensembl made their own SNP calls for Watson and

Venter

Page 2: SNP comparisons

SNPsdbSNP 12,350,000Venter 3,325,000Watson 2,060,000

1,817,000

10, 000

210,000476,000

Venter and Watson each have 3 variants that are in LSDBs.

233,000

1,032,000

Page 3: SNP comparisons

SNP density (SNPs/kb)

Page 4: SNP comparisons

ORegAnno (regions from 1 bp to over 5000 bps)

– 5,391 (Venter 7,253) SNPs that overlap ORegAnno– 3,519 (3,956) ORegAnno regions overlap the SNPs

• 2,571 ORegAnno regions are the same

– 27 (36) are in 1 bp regions• All are also in dbSNP• 11 are same

Page 5: SNP comparisons

Venter’s Indels• 486,598 non-dbSNP variants– 280,722 SNPs– 205,875 indels

• Only 94 of these are in coding exons– 65 are frame shifts

» Found GO terms for 41 entries.» 37 cellular» 33 function» 34 process» GO:0005515 {14} protein binding (Molecular function)» GO:0016020 {13} membrane (Cellular component)» GO:0005634 {13} nucleus (Cellular component)» GO:0016021 {9} integral to membrane (Cellular

component)» GO:0005622 {7} intracellular (Cellular component)» GO:0004872 {7} receptor activity (Molecular function)» GO:0005509 {6} calcium ion binding (Molecular function)

Page 6: SNP comparisons

Ensembl

• Ensembl made their own calls on the SNPs from Venter and Watson’s sequences– Need Ensembl 49 for accurate Venter SNPs

Page 7: SNP comparisons

Ensembl Venter and Venter method1

2,602,17895% in dbSNP

723,35256% in dbSNP766,195

64% in dbSNP

dbSNP 128 chromosome reports

Page 8: SNP comparisons

Ensembl Watson and Watson

1,602,563100% in dbSNP

457,98153% in dbSNP

798,567100% in dbSNP

dbSNP 128 chromosome reports

Page 9: SNP comparisons

SNP density with Ensembl calls

Page 10: SNP comparisons

Percent of SNPs by location

Page 11: SNP comparisons

SNPs in Ultra Conserved Regions• dbSNP 128 has 168 • Watson and Venter have 25– 16 of which are in dbSNP– 9 new (none from Ensembl)

• chr1 115081716 W• chr1 115081717 W• chr1 50872068 W• chr3 153647146 W• chr6 163911701 V• chr9 139162434 W• chr11 8274734 W• chr15 65665291 V• chr18 21119518 W

Page 12: SNP comparisons

SNPs in Ultra conserved regions

• 3 % of Ultra conserved regions have either Watson or Venter SNPs

• 25 % of Ultra conserved regions have SNPs from dbSNP 128 (168 SNPs), most have 1 or 2– With a maximum of 12 SNPs in one region– A runner up of 5 SNPs in one region

Page 13: SNP comparisons

UC with 12 SNPs

Page 14: SNP comparisons

What’s in Ultra Conserved regions?

• Total 481 region– 480 have conserved TFBS– 168 have Vista Enhancers from LBNL– 72 have coding exons (only 19 with SNPs)– 124 have SNPs (dbSNP 128)

• 2 more interesting UCs– UC without a conserved TFBS– UC with TFBS, SNP, Coding, and Repeat masker

Page 15: SNP comparisons

UC without conserved TFBS

Page 16: SNP comparisons

UC with TFBS, SNP, RM, Coding

Page 17: SNP comparisons

SNPs in Conserved TFBS

• About 3% of the 3.8 million binding sites have SNPs in dbSNP 128

• About 3% of the .8 million binding sites with a z score >= 2.33 have SNPs in dbSNP 128

Page 18: SNP comparisons

SNP density

This is computed on a 10kb window. The weighted average is computed for each window.

Page 19: SNP comparisons

SNP density with Ensembl

Page 20: SNP comparisons

SNPs in ORegAnno regions

Page 21: SNP comparisons

SNPs in ORegAnno regions

Page 22: SNP comparisons

SNPs in ORegAnno regions

Of the 9,427 ORegAnno regions (excluding TFBS), 1,603 of them have no SNPs from dbSNP 126 (from UCSC).

Page 23: SNP comparisons

SNPs in ORegAnno regions

Page 24: SNP comparisons

SNPs per exonVenter SNPsPercentages close in both Venter’s set and Ensembl’s.93 % none5% 1 SNP2% >1 SNP

Page 25: SNP comparisons

The End

Page 26: SNP comparisons
Page 27: SNP comparisons
Page 28: SNP comparisons
Page 29: SNP comparisons

SNP locations nt counts• Watson 2,060,544 • Venter method 1

3,325,530

Page 30: SNP comparisons

SNP density Min and Max from last slide, plus dbSNP 126

Page 31: SNP comparisons

Percent of SNPs by location

Page 32: SNP comparisons

SNP coverageThis is computed on 10kb non-overlapping windows. If there is 1 SNP in the window it gets a 1 otherwise a zero. The darker areas indicate sections where it jumps between 0 and 1 more often. A white area with a blue line at the top has at least 1 SNP per 10kb consistently.

Page 33: SNP comparisons

UCSC Genome Browser