Cited by 82Genomics and Phylogenetic StudiesGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A diploid assembly-based benchmark for variants in the major histocompatibility complex

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Most human genomes are characterized by aligning individual reads to the reference genome, but accurate long reads and linked reads now enable us to construct accurate, phased de novo assemblies. We focus on a medically important, highly variable, 5 million base-pair (bp) region where diploid assembly is particularly useful - the Major Histocompatibility Complex (MHC). Here, we develop a human genome benchmark derived from a diploid assembly for the openly-consented Genome in a Bottle sample HG002. We assemble a single contig for each haplotype, align them to the reference, call phased small and structural variants, and define a small variant benchmark for the MHC, covering 94% of the MHC and 22368 variants smaller than 50 bp, 49% more variants than a mapping-based benchmark. This benchmark reliably identifies errors in mapping-based callsets, and enables performance assessment in regions with much denser, complex variation than regions covered by previous benchmarks.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/s41467-020-18564-9

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

  • The -z200000,10000 parameter was used to improve alignment contiguity, as it was previously shown to improve variant recall in regions with dense variation.

    “We used -z200000,10000 parameter to improve alignment contiguity, as it was previously shown to improve variant recall in regions with dense variation, such as the major histocompatibility complex81.”

    From A draft human pangenome reference. (2023) · cites this paper as [81]

    The Methods section, “Making variant calls from the assembly” (page unavailable), says the authors added -z200000,10000 to increase Minimap2 mapping sensitivity and calling of complex variants in the MHC. It does not state that the parameter improved alignment contiguity or demonstrate improved variant recall in regions with dense variation. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Chin, C.-S., Wagner, J., Zeng, Q., Garrison, E., Garg, S., Fungtammasan, A., Rautiainen, M., Aganezov, S., Kirsche, M., Zarate, S., Schatz, M. C., Xiao, C., Rowell, W. J., Markello, C., Farek, J., Sedlazeck, F. J., Bansal, V., Yoo, B., Miller, N., Zhou, X., Carroll, A., Barrio, A. M., Salit, M., Marschall, T., Dilthey, A. T., & Zook, J. M.
Affiliations
  • DNAnexus (United States) (US)
  • National Institute of Standards and Technology (US)
  • LabCorp (United States) (US)
  • University of California, Santa Cruz (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • Max Planck Institute for Informatics (DE)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Pacific Biosciences (United States) (US)
  • Baylor College of Medicine (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
  • Children's Mercy Hospital (US)
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Google (United States) (US)
  • Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf (DE)
Corresponding author
Zook, Justin M.
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2020-09-22
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
4794-4794
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3089079506
Cited by
82
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 3
FWCI
3.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Communications (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Institutional Repository (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
United States Department of Commerce | National Institute of Standards and Technology (Intramural)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
major histocompatibility complex, haplotype phasing, structural variants, small variants, Genome in a Bottle, HG002, long-read sequencing, human genetic variation
MeSH terms
Cell Line, Diploidy, Haplotypes, Humans, Major Histocompatibility Complex, Genetic Variation, Genome, Human, Benchmarking

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