Back

Identification and Masking of Artefactual and Misleading Within-Host Variants in Deep-Sequencing SARS-CoV-2 Data

Anker, K. M.; Hall, M.; Evans Pena, R.; Kemp, S. A.; Clarke, J.; Zhao, L.; Bonsall, D.; Grayson, N.; Bashton, M.; The COVID-19 Genomics UK (COG-UK) Consortium, ; Walker, A. S.; Golubchik, T.; Lythgoe, K.

2026-03-13 genomics
10.64898/2026.03.13.711550 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Deep sequencing data are increasingly used to study within-host viral diversity and to inform evolutionary inference. For SARS-CoV-2, analyses based on intra-host single-nucleotide variants (iSNVs) have been widely applied to quantify within-host diversity and infer transmission dynamics. However, these applications critically depend on the reliable identification of low-frequency variants, which remain vulnerable to systematic and technical artefacts. In this study, we show that recurrent artefactual iSNVs are common in large-scale SARS-CoV-2 sequencing data and can persist even under conservative minor allele frequency (MAF) thresholds. Using data from the UKs Office for National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey, we demonstrate that such artefacts are predominantly sequencing centre-rather than protocol-specific. Each centre exhibits a modest, distinct set of recurrent artefactual variants showing little overlap with sites routinely masked at the consensus level. To address this, we developed a systematic, dataset-aware framework that uses recurrence within sequencing datasets to identify small, noise-adapted sets of artefactual iSNVs to mask. Applying this framework reduces spurious sharing of low-frequency variants between samples and qualitatively alters downstream inferences, including estimates of within-host diversity and transmission bottleneck sizes. Together, these findings highlight the importance of explicit, dataset-aware artefact control for robust inference from within-host variation, particularly as genomic studies increasingly seek to exploit sub-consensus diversity in rapidly evolving pathogens such as SARS-CoV-2.

Published in Molecular Biology and Evolution (predicted rank #5) · training set

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.