text: user298: The industry standard for aligning short reads seems to be bwa-mem. However, in my tests I have seen that using bwa backtrack (bwa-aln + bwa-sampe + bwa-samse) performs better. It is slightly slower, but gives significantly better results in terms of both sensitivity and specificity. I have tested it using the genome in a bottle data and public samples (NA12878 and NA12877 among others) and found that backtrack consistently outperformed bwa-mem. 
  So why is bwa-mem the standard? Am I wrong and other tests have shown the opposite? I don't really see how since I tested using the most common datasets and validation data. Is it that the slight increase in efficiency outweighs the decrease in performance? 
  The only other explanation I can see is that bwa backtrack is designed specifically for Illumina reads and all my tests have been on Illumina data. Is it just that bwa-mem is "sequencer agnostic"? So that we can use the same algorithm irrespective of what sequencing platform is used? In that case, it makes sense to use backtrack for if we only deal with Illumina data and mem if we can have different sequencers. But, if so, seeing as Illumina is so widespread, why isn't backtrack used more often on Illumina data? I feel I must be missing something.
  
  user73: bwa mem is newer, faster, and [should be] more accurate, particularly for longer reads.
  From the bwa man page (presumably in Heng Li's own words):
  
  BWA is a software package for mapping low-divergent sequences against a large reference genome, such as the human genome. It consists of three algorithms:  BWA-backtrack, BWA-SW and BWA-MEM. The first algorithm  is designed for Illumina sequence reads up to 100bp, while the rest two for longer sequences ranged from 70bp to 1Mbp. BWA-MEM and BWA-SW share similar  features such as long-read support and split alignment, but BWA-MEM, which is the latest, is generally recommended for high-quality queries as it is faster and  more  accurate. BWA-MEM also has better performance than BWA-backtrack for 70-100bp Illumina reads.
  
  
original_text: 298: <p>The industry standard for aligning short reads seems to be bwa-mem. However, in my tests I have seen that using bwa backtrack (bwa-aln + bwa-sampe + bwa-samse) performs better. It is slightly slower, but gives significantly better results in terms of both sensitivity and specificity. I have tested it using the genome in a bottle data and public samples (NA12878 and NA12877 among others) and found that backtrack consistently outperformed bwa-mem. </p>
  
  <p>So why is bwa-mem the standard? Am I wrong and other tests have shown the opposite? I don't really see how since I tested using the most common datasets and validation data. Is it that the slight increase in efficiency outweighs the decrease in performance? </p>
  
  <p>The only other explanation I can see is that bwa backtrack is designed specifically for Illumina reads and all my tests have been on Illumina data. Is it just that bwa-mem is "sequencer agnostic"? So that we can use the same algorithm irrespective of what sequencing platform is used? In that case, it makes sense to use backtrack for if we only deal with Illumina data and mem if we can have different sequencers. But, if so, seeing as Illumina is so widespread, why isn't backtrack used more often on Illumina data? I feel I must be missing something.</p>
   73: <p><code>bwa mem</code> is newer, faster, and [should be] more accurate, particularly for longer reads.</p>
  
  <p>From the <code>bwa</code> man page (presumably in Heng Li's own words):</p>
  
  <blockquote>
    <p>BWA is a software package for mapping low-divergent sequences against a large reference genome, such as the human genome. It consists of three algorithms:  BWA-backtrack, BWA-SW and BWA-MEM. The first algorithm  is designed for Illumina sequence reads up to 100bp, while the rest two for longer sequences ranged from 70bp to 1Mbp. BWA-MEM and BWA-SW share similar  features such as long-read support and split alignment, but <strong><em>BWA-MEM, which is the latest, is generally recommended for high-quality queries as it is faster and  more  accurate.</em></strong> BWA-MEM also has better performance than BWA-backtrack for 70-100bp Illumina reads.</p>
  </blockquote>
  