Literature DB >> 10712221

Linkage analysis in the presence of errors II: marker-locus genotyping errors modeled with hypercomplex recombination fractions.

H H Göring1, J D Terwilliger.   

Abstract

It is well known that genotyping errors lead to loss of power in gene-mapping studies and underestimation of the strength of correlations between trait- and marker-locus genotypes. In two-point linkage analysis, these errors can be absorbed in an inflated recombination-fraction estimate, leaving the test statistic quite robust. In multipoint analysis, however, genotyping errors can easily result in false exclusion of the true location of a disease-predisposing gene. In a companion article, we described a "complex-valued" extension of the recombination fraction to accommodate errors in the assignment of trait-locus genotypes, leading to a multipoint LOD score with the same robustness to errors in trait-locus genotypes that is seen with the conventional two-point LOD score. Here, a further extension of this model to "hypercomplex-valued" recombination fractions (hereafter referred to as "hypercomplex recombination fractions") is presented, to handle random and systematic sources of marker-locus genotyping errors. This leads to a multipoint method (either "model-based" or "model-free") with the same robustness to marker-locus genotyping errors that is seen with conventional two-point analysis but with the advantage that multiple marker loci can be used jointly to increase meiotic informativeness. The cost of this increased robustness is a decrease in fine-scale resolution of the estimated map location of the trait locus, in comparison with traditional multipoint analysis. This probability model further leads to algorithms for the estimation of the lower bounds for the error rates for genomewide and locus-specific genotyping, based on the null-hypothesis distribution of the LOD-score statistic in the presence of such errors. It is argued that those genome scans in which the LOD score is 0 for >50% of the genome are likely to be characterized by high rates of genotyping errors in general.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10712221      PMCID: PMC1288145          DOI: 10.1086/302798

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hum Genet        ISSN: 0002-9297            Impact factor:   11.025


  23 in total

1.  Linkage analysis in the presence of errors IV: joint pseudomarker analysis of linkage and/or linkage disequilibrium on a mixture of pedigrees and singletons when the mode of inheritance cannot be accurately specified.

Authors:  H H Göring; J D Terwilliger
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03-23       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Linkage analysis in the presence of errors III: marker loci and their map as nuisance parameters.

Authors:  H H Göring; J D Terwilliger
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03-23       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Linkage analysis in the presence of errors I: complex-valued recombination fractions and complex phenotypes.

Authors:  H H Göring; J D Terwilliger
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  The effects of genotyping errors and interference on estimation of genetic distance.

Authors:  D R Goldstein; H Zhao; T P Speed
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  1997 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 0.444

5.  Linkage disequilibrium mapping in isolated populations: the example of Finland revisited.

Authors:  A de la Chapelle; F A Wright
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1998-10-13       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Chromosome-specific panels of tri- and tetranucleotide microsatellite markers for multiplex fluorescent detection and automated genotyping: evaluation of their utility in pathology and forensics.

Authors:  A K Lindqvist; P K Magnusson; J Balciuniene; C Wadelius; E Lindholm; M E Alarcón-Riquelme; U B Gyllensten
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  Efficient strategies for genome scanning using maximum-likelihood affected-sib-pair analysis.

Authors:  P Holmans; N Craddock
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  True and false positive peaks in genomewide scans: applications of length-biased sampling to linkage mapping.

Authors:  J D Terwilliger; W D Shannon; G M Lathrop; J P Nolan; L R Goldin; G A Chase; D E Weeks
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1997-08       Impact factor: 11.025

9.  Error detection for genetic data, using likelihood methods.

Authors:  M G Ehm; M Kimmel; R W Cottingham
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 10.  Gene mapping in the 20th and 21st centuries: statistical methods, data analysis, and experimental design.

Authors:  J D Terwilliger; H H Göring
Journal:  Hum Biol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 0.553

View more
  25 in total

1.  Linkage analysis in the presence of errors IV: joint pseudomarker analysis of linkage and/or linkage disequilibrium on a mixture of pedigrees and singletons when the mode of inheritance cannot be accurately specified.

Authors:  H H Göring; J D Terwilliger
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03-23       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Linkage analysis in the presence of errors III: marker loci and their map as nuisance parameters.

Authors:  H H Göring; J D Terwilliger
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03-23       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Linkage analysis in the presence of errors I: complex-valued recombination fractions and complex phenotypes.

Authors:  H H Göring; J D Terwilliger
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Detection and integration of genotyping errors in statistical genetics.

Authors:  Eric Sobel; Jeanette C Papp; Kenneth Lange
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2002-01-08       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  A transmission/disequilibrium test that allows for genotyping errors in the analysis of single-nucleotide polymorphism data.

Authors:  D Gordon; S C Heath; X Liu; J Ott
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2001-07-05       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  A tale of two genotypes: consistency between two high-throughput genotyping centers.

Authors:  Daniel E Weeks; Yvette P Conley; Robert E Ferrell; Tammy S Mah; Michael B Gorin
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 9.043

7.  Large upward bias in estimation of locus-specific effects from genomewide scans.

Authors:  H H Göring; J D Terwilliger; J Blangero
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2001-10-09       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  The effect that genotyping errors have on the robustness of common linkage-disequilibrium measures.

Authors:  J M Akey; K Zhang; M Xiong; P Doris; L Jin
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2001-05-16       Impact factor: 11.025

9.  Undetected genotyping errors cause apparent overtransmission of common alleles in the transmission/disequilibrium test.

Authors:  Adele A Mitchell; David J Cutler; Aravinda Chakravarti
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2003-02-13       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 10.  Factors affecting statistical power in the detection of genetic association.

Authors:  Derek Gordon; Stephen J Finch
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 14.808

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.