Evaluation of consensus strategies for haplotype phasing

Motivation Haplotype phasing is a critical step for many genetic applications but incorrect estimates of phase can negatively impact downstream analyses. One proposed strategy to improve phasing accuracy is to combine multiple independent phasing estimates to overcome the limitations of any individual estimate. As such a strategy is yet to be thoroughly explored, this study provides a comprehensive evaluation of consensus strategies for haplotype phasing, exploring their performance, along with their constituent tools, across a range of real and simulated datasets with different data characteristics and on the downstream task of genotype imputation. Results Based on the outputs of existing phasing tools, we explore two different strategies to construct haplotype consensus estimators: voting across outputs from multiple phasing tools and multiple outputs of a single non-deterministic tool. We find the consensus approach from multiple tools reduces switch error by an average of 10% compared to any constituent tool when applied to European populations and has the highest accuracy regardless of population ethnicity, sample size, SNP-density or SNP frequency. Furthermore, a consensus provides a small improvement indirectly the downstream task of genotype imputation regardless of which genotype imputation tools were used. Our results provide guidance on how to produce the most accurate phasing estimates and the tradeoffs that a consensus approach may have. Availability Our implementation of consensus haplotype phasing, consHap, is available freely at https://github.com/ziadbkh/consHap.

[1]  Alan M. Kwong,et al.  A reference panel of 64,976 haplotypes for genotype imputation , 2015, Nature Genetics.

[2]  Marylyn D. Ritchie,et al.  Imputation and quality control steps for combining multiple genome-wide datasets , 2014, Front. Genet..

[3]  D. Ruppert.  The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction , 2004 .

[4]  L. Wain,et al.  Haplotype estimation for biobank scale datasets , 2016, Nature Genetics.

[5]  Po-Ru Loh,et al.  Fast and accurate long-range phasing in a UK Biobank cohort , 2015, Nature Genetics.

[6]  V. Bansal,et al.  The importance of phase information for human genomics , 2011, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[7]  Lior Rokach,et al.  Ensemble learning: A survey , 2018, WIREs Data Mining Knowl. Discov..

[8]  B. Browning,et al.  Haplotype phasing: existing methods and new developments , 2011, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[9]  E. Kirkness,et al.  Comparison of phasing strategies for whole human genomes , 2018, PLoS genetics.

[10]  Matthew R. Robinson,et al.  Accurate, scalable and integrative haplotype estimation , 2019, Nature Communications.

[11]  David Reich,et al.  Phasing of many thousands of genotyped samples. , 2012, American journal of human genetics.

[12]  Karin M. Verspoor,et al.  Exploring effective approaches for haplotype block phasing , 2019, BMC Bioinformatics.

[13]  Sharon R Grossman,et al.  Integrating common and rare genetic variation in diverse human populations , 2010, Nature.

[14]  Carson C Chow,et al.  Second-generation PLINK: rising to the challenge of larger and richer datasets , 2014, GigaScience.

[15]  Richard Durbin,et al.  Efficient haplotype matching and storage using the positional Burrows–Wheeler transform (PBWT) , 2014, Bioinform..

[16]  Zhaohui S. Qin,et al.  A comparison of phasing algorithms for trios and unrelated individuals. , 2006, American journal of human genetics.

[17]  B. Browning,et al.  Efficient multilocus association testing for whole genome association studies using localized haplotype clustering , 2007, Genetic epidemiology.

[18]  Peter Kraft,et al.  Quality control and quality assurance in genotypic data for genome‐wide association studies , 2010, Genetic epidemiology.

[19]  Alan M. Kwong,et al.  Next-generation genotype imputation service and methods , 2016, Nature Genetics.

[20]  O. Delaneau,et al.  A linear complexity phasing method for thousands of genomes , 2011, Nature Methods.

[21]  Shane A. McCarthy,et al.  Reference-based phasing using the Haplotype Reference Consortium panel , 2016, Nature Genetics.

[22]  Brian L. Browning,et al.  A one penny imputed genome from next generation reference panels , 2018, bioRxiv.

[23]  Pierre Geurts,et al.  A Random Forests Framework for Modeling Haplotypes as Mosaics of Reference Haplotypes , 2019, Front. Genet..

[24]  Céline Bellenguez,et al.  Strategies for phasing and imputation in a population isolate , 2018, Genetic epidemiology.