Cited by 62,041Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesAlgorithms and Data CompressionGenetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research

The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools

Open access
Li, Heng, Handsaker, Bob, Wysoker, Alec, Fennell, Tim, Ruan, Jue, Homer, Nils, Marth, Gabor, Abecasis, Goncalo +2 more·2009·Bioinformatics

Abstract

SUMMARY: The Sequence Alignment/Map (SAM) format is a generic alignment format for storing read alignments against reference sequences, supporting short and long reads (up to 128 Mbp) produced by different sequencing platforms. It is flexible in style, compact in size, efficient in random access and is the format in which alignments from the 1000 Genomes Project are released. SAMtools implements various utilities for post-processing alignments in the SAM format, such as indexing, variant caller and alignment viewer, and thus provides universal tools for processing read alignments. AVAILABILITY: http://samtools.sourceforge.net.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mapping reads to specific genes is relatively straightforward with available bioinformatics tools, but using these tools to distinguish between reads derived from alternative alleles of the same gene remains challenging.

    “Mapping reads to specific genes is relatively straightforward with the bioinformatics tools available today [10-13], but using these tools to distinguish between reads derived from alternative alleles of the same gene remains challenging [9].”
  • Droplet single-cell RNA sequencing has made it possible to profile transcriptomes rapidly and at large scale.

    “Droplet single cell RNA-sequencing (dscRNA-seq) has increased substantially the throughput of single cell capture and library preparation1, 10, enabling the simultaneous profiling of thousands of cells.”

    From Multiplexed droplet single-cell RNA-sequencing using natural genetic variation (2018) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Introduction and Methods passages (pages not supplied) describe the SAM alignment format and SAMtools, not droplet single-cell RNA sequencing. Searches for droplet sequencing, cell-capture throughput, and profiling thousands of cells found no passage addressing the claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Simultaneously demultiplexing and detecting doublets from more than two individuals has not been possible.

    “While strategies to demultiplex cells from different species1, 10, 17 or host and graft samples17 have been reported, simultaneously demultiplexing and detecting doublets from more than two individuals has not been possible.”

    From Multiplexed droplet single-cell RNA-sequencing using natural genetic variation (2018) · cites this paper as [10]

    The Introduction and Methods sections describe the SAM/BAM alignment format and SAMtools, not cell demultiplexing. Searches for simultaneous demultiplexing, doublet detection, and more than two individuals found no passage addressing the claimed limitation. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • After TMM and limma-voom normalization, samples A and B were well separated by multidimensional scaling, and two replicates with abnormal GC distributions were separated from other sample A replicates at dimension 2.

    “After the Trimmmed Mean of M-values (TMM)55 and limma-voom normalization, we found that samples A and B were well distinguished by multidimensional scaling (Supplementary Fig. 21d), and that the two replicates with abnormal GC content distributions (PGM1.A.4 and PGM2.A.2) were separated from the other replicates of sample A at dimension 2.”
  • For ChIP-seq alignments, only uniquely mapped reads were kept and duplicate reads were removed.

    “Only uniquely mapped reads were retained, and the alignments were subsequently filtered using the SAMtools package (v0.1.19)88 to remove duplicate reads.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Li, H., Handsaker, B., Wysoker, A., Fennell, T., Ruan, J., Homer, N., Marth, G., Abecasis, G., Durbin, R., & 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup
Affiliations
  • Boston College (US)
  • 1 Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Cambridge, CB10 1SA, UK, 2Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard, Cambridge, MA 02141, USA, 3Beijing Institute of Genomics, Chinese Academy of Science, Beijing 100029, China, 4Department of Computer Science, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, 5Department of Biology, Boston College, Chestnut Hill, MA 02467, 6Center for Statistical Genetics, Department of Biostatistics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA and 7http://1000genomes.org
Corresponding author
Durbin, Richard
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2009-06-08
Volume
25
Issue
16
Pages
2078-2079
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W2108234281
Cited by
62,041
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 4515 · 2025: 5629 · 2024: 6225 · 2023: 5854 · 2022: 6476 · 2021: 7180 · 2020: 5531 · 2019: 4365 · 2018: 3577 · 2017: 3034 · 2016: 2584 · 2015: 2289 · 2014: 1917 · 2013: 1350 · 2012: 853
FWCI
194.13
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (077192/Z/05/Z)
  • National Institutes of Health (077192)
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (U54HG002750, R01HG004719)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Algorithms and Data Compression
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genetics, Bioinformatics, and Biomedical Research
Keywords
SAMtools, variant calling, 1000 Genomes Project, long reads
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Base Sequence, Molecular Sequence Data, Software, Sequence Alignment, Genome, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Computational Biology, Genomics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review