Literature DB >> 10964223

Comparison of microsatellites and amplified fragment length polymorphism markers for parentage analysis.

S Gerber1, S Mariette, R Streiff, C Bodénès, A Kremer.   

Abstract

This study compares the properties of dominant markers, such as amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs), with those of codominant multiallelic markers, such as microsatellites, in reconstructing parentage. These two types of markers were used to search for both parents of an individual without prior knowledge of their relationships, by calculating likelihood ratios based on genotypic data, including mistyping. Experimental data on 89 oak trees genotyped for six microsatellite markers and 159 polymorphic AFLP loci were used as a starting point for simulations and tests. Both sets of markers produced high exclusion probabilities, and among dominant markers those with dominant allele frequencies in the range 0.1-0.4 were more informative. Such codominant and dominant markers can be used to construct powerful statistical tests to decide whether a genotyped individual (or two individuals) can be considered as the true parent (or parent pair). Gene flow from outside the study stand (GFO), inferred from parentage analysis with microsatellites, overestimated the true GFO, whereas with AFLPs it was underestimated. As expected, dominant markers are less efficient than codominant markers for achieving this, but can still be used with good confidence, especially when loci are deliberately selected according to their allele frequencies.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10964223     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-294x.2000.00961.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Ecol        ISSN: 0962-1083            Impact factor:   6.185


  37 in total

1.  Mating strategies in flowering plants: the outcrossing-selfing paradigm and beyond.

Authors:  Spencer C H Barrett
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2003-06-29       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Sibship reconstruction from genetic data with typing errors.

Authors:  Jinliang Wang
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  Larger female fish contribute disproportionately more to self-replenishment.

Authors:  R Beldade; S J Holbrook; R J Schmitt; S Planes; D Malone; G Bernardi
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 5.349

4.  A last stand in the Po valley: genetic structure and gene flow patterns in Ulmus minor and U. pumila.

Authors:  B Bertolasi; C Leonarduzzi; A Piotti; S Leonardi; L Zago; L Gui; F Gorian; I Vanetti; G Binelli
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.357

5.  The power of single-nucleotide polymorphisms for large-scale parentage inference.

Authors:  Eric C Anderson; John Carlos Garza
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-12-30       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Using genetic markers to directly estimate gene flow and reproductive success parameters in plants on the basis of naturally regenerated seedlings.

Authors:  J Burczyk; W T Adams; D S Birkes; I J Chybicki
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2006-02-19       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Proximity is not a proxy for parentage in an animal-dispersed Neotropical canopy palm.

Authors:  Uzay U Sezen; Robin L Chazdon; Kent E Holsinger
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  DNA fingerprinting in botany: past, present, future.

Authors:  Hilde Nybom; Kurt Weising; Björn Rotter
Journal:  Investig Genet       Date:  2014-01-03

9.  Connectivity dominates larval replenishment in a coastal reef fish metapopulation.

Authors:  Pablo Saenz-Agudelo; Geoffrey P Jones; Simon R Thorrold; Serge Planes
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-02-16       Impact factor: 5.349

10.  Genome scanning for interspecific differentiation between two closely related oak species [Quercus robur L. and Q. petraea (Matt.) Liebl.].

Authors:  Caroline Scotti-Saintagne; Stéphanie Mariette; Ilga Porth; Pablo G Goicoechea; Teresa Barreneche; Catherine Bodénès; Kornel Burg; Antoine Kremer
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.