Abstract
The human genome reference established a shared coordinate system for genome function, but it is incomplete and not fully representative of human diversity. Here, we benchmark how genome representation and corresponding analytical frameworks for each representation shape functional genomics using chromatin accessibility sequencing (ATAC-seq), RNA sequencing, whole-genome bisulfite sequencing, and chromosome conformation capture (Hi-C) data from lymphoblastoid cell lines derived from five individuals with fully phased genome assemblies. We compare results across hg38, CHM13, the draft human pangenome, and each individual’s maternal and paternal assemblies. Because current pipelines and quality control conventions are tuned to hg38, several of these comparisons reflect genome representation in the context of available methods, rather than sequence alone. Individual identity accounts for 57.52-78.47% of total variance in functional estimates, whereas genome choice contributes 0.002-7.85% and sample-by-genome interactions contribute 0.63-5.43%. About 2% of biological signals are detectable only with personal assemblies. Although these effects are modest overall, some biologically important features remain inaccessible to linear references. Consistent with this, graph-based DNA methylation analysis in the human pangenome reveals a non-reference AluY5a insertion within a putative TNKS enhancer at chromosome 8p23.1 that becomes visible and hypermethylated only in the pangenome.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Adam Novak, Jordan Eizenga, and Benedict Paten for assistance in using pangenomic methods. B. Koebbe and E. Martin from CGSSB for assistance with processing of data. Genome Technology Access Center (GTAC) assisted with RNA-seq prep.
Funding
T.W. discloses support for the research of this work from National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants U41HG010972, U41HG010971, U24HG012070, and R01HG007175. J.F.M.-V., X.Z., C.T., E.B., M.K., D.A., T.L., X.X., N.T., W.Z., J.E.G., Z.X. (Zheng Xu), Z.X. (Zilan Xin), Q.F., H.A.L., N.O.S., R.S.F., and D.L. declare no relevant funding.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Consortia
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Macias-Velasco, J.F., Zhuo, X., Tomlinson, C. et al. Benchmarking genome choice in functional genomics analyses. Nat Commun (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-73663-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-73663-3