SUMMARY: MGI sequencing is reported to be an inexpensive solution to obtain genomics information. There is a growing need for software and tools to analyse MGI's outputs efficiently. mgikit is a tool collection to demultiplex MGI fastq data, reformat it effectively and produce visual quality reports. mgikit overcomes several limitations of the standard MGI demultiplexer. It is highly customizable to suit different kinds of datasets and is designed to achieve high performance and optimal memory utilization. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The tool and its documentation are available at: https://sagc-bioinformatics.github.io/mgikit/.

MOTIVATION: Phylogenetics has moved into the era of genomics, incorporating enormous volumes of data to study questions at both shallow and deep scales. With this increase in information, phylogeneticists need new tools and skills to manipulate and analyze these data. To facilitate these tasks and encourage reproducibility, the community is increasingly moving toward automated workflows. RESULTS: Here we present pipesnake, a phylogenomics pipeline written in Nextflow for the processing, assembly, and phylogenetic estimation of genomic data from short-read sequences. pipesnake is an easy to use and efficient software package designed for this next era in phylogenetics. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: pipesnake is publicly available on GitHub at https://github.com/AusARG/pipesnake and accompanied by documentation and a wiki/tutorial.

MOTIVATION: The high accuracy of recent haplotype phasing tools is enabling the integration of haplotype (or phase) information more widely in genetic investigations. One such possibility is phase-aware expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis, where haplotype-based analysis has the potential to detect associations that may otherwise be missed by standard SNP-based approaches. RESULTS: We present eQTLHap, a novel method to investigate associations between gene expression and genetic variants, considering their haplotypic and genotypic effect. Using multiple simulations based on real data, we demonstrate that phase-aware eQTL analysis significantly outperforms typical SNP-based methods when the causal genetic architecture involves multiple SNPs. We show that phase-aware eQTL analysis is robust to phasing errors, showing only a minor impact ($<4\%$) on sensitivity. Applying eQTLHap to real GEUVADIS and GTEx datasets detects numerous novel eQTLs undetected by a single-SNP approach, with 22 eQTLs replicating across studies or tissue types, highlighting the utility of phase-aware eQTL analysis. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: https://github.com/ziadbkh/eQTLHap. CONTACT: [email protected]. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Briefings in Bioinformatics online.

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. However, such a strategy is yet to be thoroughly explored. This study provides a comprehensive evaluation of consensus strategies for haplotype phasing. We explore the performance of different consensus paradigms, and the effect of specific constituent tools, across several datasets with different characteristics and their impact on the downstream task of genotype imputation. 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 that the consensus approach from multiple tools reduces SE 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, variant density or variant frequency. Furthermore, the consensus estimator improves the accuracy of the downstream task of genotype imputation carried out by the widely used Minimac3, pbwt and BEAGLE5 tools. Our results provide guidance on how to produce the most accurate phasing estimates and the trade-offs that a consensus approach may have. Our implementation of consensus haplotype phasing, consHap, is available freely at https://github.com/ziadbkh/consHap. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Briefings in Bioinformatics online.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of phase, the specific allele sequence on each copy of homologous chromosomes, is increasingly recognized as critical for detecting certain classes of disease-associated mutations. One approach for detecting such mutations is through phased haplotype association analysis. While the accuracy of methods for phasing genotype data has been widely explored, there has been little attention given to phasing accuracy at haplotype block scale. Understanding the combined impact of the accuracy of phasing tool and the method used to determine haplotype blocks on the error rate within the determined blocks is essential to conduct accurate haplotype analyses. RESULTS: We present a systematic study exploring the relationship between seven widely used phasing methods and two common methods for determining haplotype blocks. The evaluation focuses on the number of haplotype blocks that are incorrectly phased. Insights from these results are used to develop a haplotype estimator based on a consensus of three tools. The consensus estimator achieved the most accurate phasing in all applied tests. Individually, EAGLE2, BEAGLE and SHAPEIT2 alternate in being the best performing tool in different scenarios. Determining haplotype blocks based on linkage disequilibrium leads to more correctly phased blocks compared to a sliding window approach. We find that there is little difference between phasing sections of a genome (e.g. a gene) compared to phasing entire chromosomes. Finally, we show that the location of phasing error varies when the tools are applied to the same data several times, a finding that could be important for downstream analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of phasing and block determination algorithms and their interaction impacts the accuracy of phased haplotype blocks. This work provides guidance and evidence for the different design choices needed for analyses using haplotype blocks. The study highlights a number of issues that may have limited the replicability of previous haplotype analysis.