E Sobel1, H Sengul, D E Weeks. 1. Department of Human Genetics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe, implement, and test an efficient algorithm to obtain multipoint identity-by-descent (IBD) probabilities at arbitrary positions among marker loci for general pedigrees. Unlike existing programs, our algorithm can analyze data sets with large numbers of people and markers. The algorithm has been implemented in the SimWalk2 computer package. METHODS: Using a rigorous testing regimen containing five pedigrees of various sizes with realistic marker data, we compared several widely used IBD computation programs: Allegro, Aspex, GeneHunter, MapMaker/Sibs, Mendel, Sage, SimWalk2, and Solar. RESULTS: The testing revealed a few discrepancies, particularly on consanguineous pedigrees, but overall excellent results in the deterministic multipoint packages. SimWalk2 was also found to be in good agreement with the deterministic multipoint programs, usually matching to two decimal places the kinship coefficient that ranges from 0 to 1. However, the packages based on single-point IBD estimation, while consistent with each other, often showed poor results, disagreeing with the multipoint kinship results by as much as 0.5. CONCLUSIONS: Our testing has clearly shown that multipoint IBD estimation is much better than single-point estimation. In addition, our testing has validated our algorithm for estimating IBD probabilities at arbitrary positions on general pedigrees. Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
OBJECTIVES: To describe, implement, and test an efficient algorithm to obtain multipoint identity-by-descent (IBD) probabilities at arbitrary positions among marker loci for general pedigrees. Unlike existing programs, our algorithm can analyze data sets with large numbers of people and markers. The algorithm has been implemented in the SimWalk2 computer package. METHODS: Using a rigorous testing regimen containing five pedigrees of various sizes with realistic marker data, we compared several widely used IBD computation programs: Allegro, Aspex, GeneHunter, MapMaker/Sibs, Mendel, Sage, SimWalk2, and Solar. RESULTS: The testing revealed a few discrepancies, particularly on consanguineous pedigrees, but overall excellent results in the deterministic multipoint packages. SimWalk2 was also found to be in good agreement with the deterministic multipoint programs, usually matching to two decimal places the kinship coefficient that ranges from 0 to 1. However, the packages based on single-point IBD estimation, while consistent with each other, often showed poor results, disagreeing with the multipoint kinship results by as much as 0.5. CONCLUSIONS: Our testing has clearly shown that multipoint IBD estimation is much better than single-point estimation. In addition, our testing has validated our algorithm for estimating IBD probabilities at arbitrary positions on general pedigrees. Copyright 2001 S. Karger AG, Basel
Authors: Julian Schubert; Aleksandra Siekierska; Mélanie Langlois; Patrick May; Clément Huneau; Felicitas Becker; Hiltrud Muhle; Arvid Suls; Johannes R Lemke; Carolien G F de Kovel; Holger Thiele; Kathryn Konrad; Amit Kawalia; Mohammad R Toliat; Thomas Sander; Franz Rüschendorf; Almuth Caliebe; Inga Nagel; Bernard Kohl; Angela Kecskés; Maxime Jacmin; Katia Hardies; Sarah Weckhuysen; Erik Riesch; Thomas Dorn; Eva H Brilstra; Stephanie Baulac; Rikke S Møller; Helle Hjalgrim; Bobby P C Koeleman; Karin Jurkat-Rott; Frank Lehman-Horn; Jared C Roach; Gustavo Glusman; Leroy Hood; David J Galas; Benoit Martin; Peter A M de Witte; Saskia Biskup; Peter De Jonghe; Ingo Helbig; Rudi Balling; Peter Nürnberg; Alexander D Crawford; Camila V Esguerra; Yvonne G Weber; Holger Lerche Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2014-11-02 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Andrew H Crosby; Heema Patel; Barry A Chioza; Christos Proukakis; Kay Gurtz; Michael A Patton; Reza Sharifi; Gaurav Harlalka; Michael A Simpson; Katherine Dick; Johanna A Reed; Ali Al-Memar; Zofia M A Chrzanowska-Lightowlers; Harold E Cross; Robert N Lightowlers Journal: Am J Hum Genet Date: 2010-10-21 Impact factor: 11.025