The DNA sequencing technologies in use today produce either highly accurate short reads or lessaccurate long reads. We report the optimization of circular consensus sequencing (CCS) to improve the accuracy of single-molecule real-time (SMRT) sequencing (PacBio) and generate highly accurate (99.8%) long high-fidelity (HiFi) reads with an average length of 13.5 kilobases (kb). We applied our approach to sequence the well-characterized human HG002/NA24385 genome and obtained precision and recall rates of at least 99.91% for single-nucleotide variants (SNVs), 95.98% for insertions and deletions <50 bp (indels) and 95.99% for structural variants. Our CCS method matches or exceeds the ability of short-read sequencing to detect small variants and structural variants. We estimate that 2,434 discordances are correctable mistakes in the 'genome in a bottle' (GIAB) benchmark set. Nearly all (99.64%) variants can be phased into haplotypes, further improving variant detection. De novo genome assembly using CCS reads alone produced a contiguous and accurate genome with a contig N50 of >15 megabases (Mb) and concordance of 99.997%, substantially outperforming assembly with less-accurate long reads.

De novo assembly of a human genome using nanopore long-read sequences has been reported but it used more than 150,000 CPU hours and weeks of wall-clock time. To enable rapid human genome assembly we present Shasta, a de novo long read assembler, and polishing algorithms named MarginPolish and HELEN. Using a single PromethION nanopore sequencer and our toolkit, we assembled eleven highly contiguous human genomes de novo in nine days. We achieved ~63x coverage, 42 Kb read N50, and 6.5x coverage in 100 Kb+ reads using three flow cells per sample. Shasta produced a complete haploid human genome assembly in under six hours on a single commercial compute node. MarginPolish and HELEN polished haploid assemblies to more than 99.9% identity (QV30) with nanopore reads alone. Addition of proximity ligation (Hi-C) sequencing enabled near chromosome-level scaffolds for all eleven genomes. We compare our assembly performance to existing methods for diploid, haploid, and trio-binned human samples and report superior accuracy and speed.

The Genome in a Bottle Consortium, hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is creating reference materials and data for human genome sequencing, as well as methods for genome comparison and benchmarking. Here, we describe a large, diverse set of sequencing data for seven human genomes; five are current or candidate NIST Reference Materials. The pilot genome, NA12878, has been released as NIST RM 8398. We also describe data from two Personal Genome Project trios, one of Ashkenazim Jewish ancestry and one of Chinese ancestry. The data come from 12 technologies: BioNano Genomics, Complete Genomics paired-end and LFR, Ion Proton exome, Oxford Nanopore, Pacific Biosciences, SOLiD, 10X Genomics GemCode WGS, and Illumina exome and WGS paired-end, mate-pair, and synthetic long reads. Cell lines, DNA, and data from these individuals are publicly available. Therefore, we expect these data to be useful for revealing novel information about the human genome and improving sequencing technologies, SNP, indel, and structural variant calling, and de novo assembly.

The Genome in a Bottle Consortium, hosted by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is creating reference materials and data for human genome sequencing, as well as methods for genome comparison and benchmarking. Here, we describe a large, diverse set of sequencing data for seven human genomes; five are current or candidate NIST Reference Materials. The pilot genome, NA12878, has been released as NIST RM 8398. We also describe data from two Personal Genome Project trios, one of Ashkenazim Jewish ancestry and one of Chinese ancestry. The data come from 12 technologies: BioNano Genomics, Complete Genomics paired-end and LFR, Ion Proton exome, Oxford Nanopore, Pacific Biosciences, SOLiD, 10X Genomics GemCodeTM WGS, and Illumina exome and WGS paired-end, mate-pair, and synthetic long reads. Cell lines, DNA, and data from these individuals are publicly available. Therefore, we expect these data to be useful for revealing novel information about the human genome and improving sequencing technologies, SNP, indel, and structural variant calling, and de novo assembly.

Assessing accuracy of NGS variant calling is immensely facilitated by a robust benchmarking strategy and tools to carry it out in a standard way. Benchmarking variant calls requires careful attention to definitions of performance metrics, sophisticated comparison approaches, and stratification by variant type and genome context. The Global Alliance for Genomics and Health (GA4GH) Benchmarking Team has developed standardized performance metrics and tools for benchmarking germline small variant calls. This Team includes representatives from sequencing technology developers, government agencies, academic bioinformatics researchers, clinical laboratories, and commercial technology and bioinformatics developers for whom benchmarking variant calls is essential to their work. Benchmarking variant calls is a challenging problem for many reasons:• Evaluating variant calls requires complex matching algorithms and standardized counting, because the same variant may be represented differently in truth and query callsets.• Defining and interpreting resulting metrics such as precision (aka positive predictive value = TP/(TP+FP)) and recall (aka sensitivity = TP/(TP+FN)) requires standardization to draw robust conclusions about comparative performance for different variant calling methods.• Performance of NGS methods can vary depending on variant types and genome context; and as a result understanding performance requires meaningful stratification.• High-confidence variant calls and regions that can be used as "truth" to accurately identify false positives and negatives are difficult to define, and reliable calls for the most challenging regions and variants remain out of reach.We have made significant progress on standardizing comparison methods, metric definitions and reporting, as well as developing and using truth sets. Our methods are publicly available on GitHub (https://github.com/ga4gh/benchmarking-tools) and in a web-based app on precisionFDA, which allow users to compare their variant calls against truth sets and to obtain a standardized report on their variant calling performance. Our methods have been piloted in the precisionFDA variant calling challenges to identify the best-in-class variant calling methods within highconfidence regions. Finally, we recommend a set of best practices for using our tools and critically evaluating the results.

To evaluate and compare the performance of variant calling methods and their confidence scores, comparisons between a test call set and a "gold standard" need to be carried out. Unfortunately, these comparisons are not straightforward with the current Variant Call Files (VCF), which are the standard output of most variant calling algorithms for high-throughput sequencing data. Comparisons of VCFs are often confounded by the different representations of indels, MNPs, and combinations thereof with SNVs in complex regions of the genome, resulting in misleading results. A variant caller is inherently a classification method designed to score putative variants with confidence scores that could permit controlling the rate of false positives (FP) or false negatives (FN) for a given application. Receiver operator curves (ROC) and the area under the ROC (AUC) are efficient metrics to evaluate a test call set versus a gold standard. However, in the case of VCF data this also requires a special accounting to deal with discrepant representations. We developed a novel algorithm for comparing variant call sets that deals with complex call representation discrepancies and through a dynamic programing method that minimizes false positives and negatives globally across the entire call sets for accurate performance evaluation of VCFs.

Innovations in sequencing technologies have allowed biologists to make incredible advances in understanding biological systems. As experience grows, researchers increasingly recognize that analyzing the wealth of data provided by these new sequencing platforms requires careful attention to detail for robust results. Thus far, much of the scientific Communit’s focus for use in bacterial genomics has been on evaluating genome assembly algorithms and rigorously validating assembly program performance. Missing, however, is a focus on critical evaluation of variant callers for these genomes. Variant calling is essential for comparative genomics as it yields insights into nucleotide-level organismal differences. Variant calling is a multistep process with a host of potential error sources that may lead to incorrect variant calls. Identifying and resolving these incorrect calls is critical for bacterial genomics to advance. The goal of this review is to provide guidance on validating algorithms and pipelines used in variant calling for bacterial genomics. First, we will provide an overview of the variant calling procedures and the potential sources of error associated with the methods. We will then identify appropriate datasets for use in evaluating algorithms and describe statistical methods for evaluating algorithm performance. As variant calling moves from basic research to the applied setting, standardized methods for performance evaluation and reporting are required; it is our hope that this review provides the groundwork for the development of these standards.

The Human Pangenome Reference Consortium (HPRC) presents a first draft human pangenome reference. The pangenome contains 47 phased, diploid assemblies from a cohort of genetically diverse individuals. These assemblies cover more than 99% of the expected sequence and are more than 99% accurate at the structural and base-pair levels. Based on alignments of the assemblies, we generated a draft pangenome that captures known variants and haplotypes, reveals novel alleles at structurally complex loci, and adds 119 million base pairs of euchromatic polymorphic sequence and 1,529 gene duplications relative to the existing reference, GRCh38. Roughly 90 million of the additional base pairs derive from structural variation. Using our draft pangenome to analyze short-read data reduces errors when discovering small variants by 34% and boosts the detected structural variants per haplotype by 104% compared to GRCh38-based workflows, and by 34% compared to using previous diversity sets of genome assemblies.