Background High-throughput short-read sequencing has become a core technology for genomics, but the rapid expansion of available platforms has made it increasingly important to benchmark them under standardized conditions. A major challenge is that conventional reference-based comparisons confound true sequencing errors with inherited variation and reference bias, making it difficult to isolate platform-intrinsic performance. Results We benchmarked nine short-read chemistries across seven DNA sequencers using two highly characterized benchmark samples, HG002 and COLO829BL, together with donor-specific assemblies to measure sequencing errors against sample-matched genomic references. This strategy separated authentic platform errors from biological divergence and revealed substantial differences in substitution, indel, read-position, and sequence-context error profiles. Element AVITI UltraQ and Roche SBX-D showed the lowest substitution error rates, whereas Ultima and Roche chemistries exhibited the strongest indel-associated biases. We also found pronounced platform-specific effects in low-complexity regions and trinucleotide contexts, including homopolymer-associated errors and context-dependent substitution skews that are directly relevant to rare-variant detection. In addition, we show that donor-specific references are essential for unbiased base-quality recalibration because they minimize reference bias and more faithfully support cross-platform comparison and low-frequency variant-calling thresholds. Conclusions Donor-specific assembly-based benchmarking provides a robust framework for measuring true short-read sequencing errors and comparing platforms on a common, sample-matched basis. Our results establish a comprehensive reference for the community and show that authentic error profiles can guide platform selection, quality filtering, and improved detection of rare somatic variation.
McGee, S. R., Smith, J. D., Frazar, C. D., Ryke, E., Vollger, M. R., Kwon, Y., Bennett, J. T., Eichler, E. E., Stergachis, A., Wei, C.-L.
Advertisement
Stats
- Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
- Views 7
- Comments 0