Literature DB >> 11791214

Probability of detection of genotyping errors and mutations as inheritance inconsistencies in nuclear-family data.

Julie A Douglas1, Andrew D Skol, Michael Boehnke.   

Abstract

Gene-mapping studies routinely rely on checking for Mendelian transmission of marker alleles in a pedigree, as a means of screening for genotyping errors and mutations, with the implicit assumption that, if a pedigree is consistent with Mendel's laws of inheritance, then there are no genotyping errors. However, the occurrence of inheritance inconsistencies alone is an inadequate measure of the number of genotyping errors, since the rate of occurrence depends on the number and relationships of genotyped pedigree members, the type of errors, and the distribution of marker-allele frequencies. In this article, we calculate the expected probability of detection of a genotyping error or mutation as an inheritance inconsistency in nuclear-family data, as a function of both the number of genotyped parents and offspring and the marker-allele frequency distribution. Through computer simulation, we explore the sensitivity of our analytic calculations to the underlying error model. Under a random-allele-error model, we find that detection rates are 51%-77% for multiallelic markers and 13%-75% for biallelic markers; detection rates are generally lower when the error occurs in a parent than in an offspring, unless a large number of offspring are genotyped. Errors are especially difficult to detect for biallelic markers with equally frequent alleles, even when both parents are genotyped; in this case, the maximum detection rate is 34% for four-person nuclear families. Error detection in families in which parents are not genotyped is limited, even with multiallelic markers. Given these results, we recommend that additional error checking (e.g., on the basis of multipoint analysis) be performed, beyond routine checking for Mendelian consistency. Furthermore, our results permit assessment of the plausibility of an observed number of inheritance inconsistencies for a family, allowing the detection of likely pedigree-rather than genotyping-errors in the early stages of a genome scan. Such early assessments are valuable in either the targeting of families for resampling or discontinued genotyping.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11791214      PMCID: PMC419989          DOI: 10.1086/338919

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


  14 in total

1.  A multipoint method for detecting genotyping errors and mutations in sibling-pair linkage data.

Authors:  J A Douglas; M Boehnke; K Lange
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03-28       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Statistical tests for detection of misspecified relationships by use of genome-screen data.

Authors:  M S McPeek; L Sun
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Improved inference of relationship for pairs of individuals.

Authors:  M P Epstein; W L Duren; M Boehnke
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-10-13       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Identification and analysis of error types in high-throughput genotyping.

Authors:  K R Ewen; M Bahlo; S A Treloar; D F Levinson; B Mowry; J W Barlow; S J Foote
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-08-02       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  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

6.  The estimation of pairwise relationships.

Authors:  E A Thompson
Journal:  Ann Hum Genet       Date:  1975-10       Impact factor: 1.670

7.  Identifying marker typing incompatibilities in linkage analysis.

Authors:  H M Stringham; M Boehnke
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1996-10       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Mutation of human short tandem repeats.

Authors:  J L Weber; C Wong
Journal:  Hum Mol Genet       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 6.150

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

10.  An analytic solution to single nucleotide polymorphism error-detection rates in nuclear families: implications for study design.

Authors:  D Gordon; S M Leal; S C Heath; J Ott
Journal:  Pac Symp Biocomput       Date:  2000
View more
  48 in total

1.  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

2.  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

3.  SNP genotyping on a genome-wide amplified DOP-PCR template.

Authors:  Struan F A Grant; Simone Steinlicht; Ulrike Nentwich; Rainer Kern; Barbara Burwinkel; Ralf Tolle
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2002-11-15       Impact factor: 16.971

4.  Testing for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium in samples with related individuals.

Authors:  Catherine Bourgain; Mark Abney; Daniel Schneider; Carole Ober; Mary Sara McPeek
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2004-09-15       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Incorporating genotyping uncertainty in haplotype inference for single-nucleotide polymorphisms.

Authors:  Hosung Kang; Zhaohui S Qin; Tianhua Niu; Jun S Liu
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-02-13       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  Identification of fetal and maternal single nucleotide polymorphisms in candidate genes that predispose to spontaneous preterm labor with intact membranes.

Authors:  Roberto Romero; Digna R Velez Edwards; Juan Pedro Kusanovic; Sonia S Hassan; Shali Mazaki-Tovi; Edi Vaisbuch; Chong Jai Kim; Tinnakorn Chaiworapongsa; Brad D Pearce; Lara A Friel; Jacquelaine Bartlett; Madan Kumar Anant; Benjamin A Salisbury; Gerald F Vovis; Min Seob Lee; Ricardo Gomez; Ernesto Behnke; Enrique Oyarzun; Gerard Tromp; Scott M Williams; Ramkumar Menon
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 8.661

7.  Identifying nineteenth century genealogical links from genotypes.

Authors:  Jim Stankovich; Melanie Bahlo; Justin P Rubio; Christopher R Wilkinson; Russell Thomson; Annette Banks; Maree Ring; Simon J Foote; Terence P Speed
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2005-05-10       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 8.  Haplotyping methods for pedigrees.

Authors:  Guimin Gao; David B Allison; Ina Hoeschele
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2009-01-27       Impact factor: 0.444

9.  Genotyping error detection in samples of unrelated individuals without replicate genotyping.

Authors:  Nianjun Liu; Dabao Zhang; Hongyu Zhao
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 0.444

10.  Deviations from hardy-weinberg equilibrium in parental and unaffected sibling genotype data.

Authors:  Bingshan Li; Suzanne M Leal
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2008-12-12       Impact factor: 0.444

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.