Literature DB >> 14732904

Inherent bias toward the null hypothesis in conventional multipoint nonparametric linkage analysis.

Nicholas J Schork1, Tiffany A Greenwood.   

Abstract

Traditional nonparametric "multipoint" statistical procedures have been developed for assigning allele-sharing values at a locus of interest to pairs of relatives for linkage studies. These procedures attempt to accommodate a lack of informativity, nongenotyped loci, missing data, and related issues concerning the genetic markers used in a linkage study. However, such procedures often cannot overcome these phenomena in compelling ways and, as a result, assign relevant relative pairs allele-sharing values that are "expected" for those pairs. The practice of assigning expected allele-sharing values to relative pairs in the face of a lack of explicit allele-transmission information can bias traditional nonparametric linkage test statistics toward the null hypothesis of no locus effect. This bias is due to the use of expected values, rather than to a lack of information about actual allele sharing at relevant marker loci. The bias will vary from study to study on the basis of the DNA markers, sample size, relative-pair types, and pedigree structures used, but it can be extremely pronounced and could contribute to a lack of consistent success in the application of traditional nonparametric linkage analyses to complex human traits and diseases. There are several potential ways to overcome this problem, but their foundations deserve greater research. We expose many of the issues concerning allele sharing with data from a large affected-sibling-pair study investigating the genetic basis of autism.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14732904      PMCID: PMC1181928          DOI: 10.1086/381714

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


  15 in total

Review 1.  Variance component methods for detecting complex trait loci.

Authors:  J Blangero; J T Williams; L Almasy
Journal:  Adv Genet       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 1.944

2.  A manic depressive history.

Authors:  N Risch; D Botstein
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 38.330

3.  Genome scanning for linkage: an overview.

Authors:  A S Whittemore
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Parametric and nonparametric linkage analysis: a unified multipoint approach.

Authors:  L Kruglyak; M J Daly; M P Reeve-Daly; E S Lander
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1996-06       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  The future of genetic studies of complex human diseases.

Authors:  N Risch; K Merikangas
Journal:  Science       Date:  1996-09-13       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  Faster multipoint linkage analysis using Fourier transforms.

Authors:  L Kruglyak; E S Lander
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 1.479

7.  The affected-pedigree-member method of linkage analysis.

Authors:  D E Weeks; K Lange
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1988-02       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Robust multipoint linkage analysis: an extension of the Haseman-Elston method.

Authors:  J M Olson
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 2.135

9.  Multipoint interval mapping of quantitative trait loci, using sib pairs.

Authors:  D W Fulker; S S Cherny; L R Cardon
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 10.  Genetic dissection of complex traits.

Authors:  E S Lander; N J Schork
Journal:  Science       Date:  1994-09-30       Impact factor: 47.728

View more
  14 in total

1.  Bias toward the null hypothesis in model-free linkage analysis is highly dependent on the test statistic used.

Authors:  Heather J Cordell
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-04-29       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  No bias in linkage analysis.

Authors:  Goncalo Abecasis; Nancy Cox; Mark J Daly; Leonid Kruglyak; Nan Laird; Kyriacos Markianos; Nick Patterson
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  No "bias" toward the null hypothesis in most conventional multipoint nonparametric linkage analyses.

Authors:  Indranil Mukhopadhyay; Eleanor Feingold; Daniel E Weeks
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 11.025

4.  Conventional multipoint nonparametric linkage analysis is not necessarily inherently biased.

Authors:  Peter M Visscher; Naomi R Wray
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 11.025

5.  "Bias toward the null" means reduced power.

Authors:  Solveig K Sieberts; Karl W Broman; Daniel F Gudbjartsson
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  A genomewide search using an original pairwise sampling approach for large genealogies identifies a new locus for total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in two genetically differentiated isolates of Sardinia.

Authors:  Mario Falchi; Paola Forabosco; Evelina Mocci; Cesare Cappio Borlino; Andrea Picciau; Emanuela Virdis; Ivana Persico; Debora Parracciani; Andrea Angius; Mario Pirastu
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-10-11       Impact factor: 11.025

7.  Weighting affected sib pairs by marker informativity.

Authors:  Daniel Franke; Andreas Ziegler
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2005-06-28       Impact factor: 11.025

8.  Unifying ideas for non-parametric linkage analysis.

Authors:  Aaron G Day-Williams; John Blangero; Thomas D Dyer; Kenneth Lange; Eric M Sobel
Journal:  Hum Hered       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 0.444

9.  Large-scale integration of human genetic and physical maps.

Authors:  Caroline M Nievergelt; Douglas W Smith; J Bradley Kohlenberg; Nicholas J Schork
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2004-05-12       Impact factor: 9.043

Review 10.  Genetic assessment of additional endophenotypes from the Consortium on the Genetics of Schizophrenia Family Study.

Authors:  Tiffany A Greenwood; Laura C Lazzeroni; Monica E Calkins; Robert Freedman; Michael F Green; Raquel E Gur; Ruben C Gur; Gregory A Light; Keith H Nuechterlein; Ann Olincy; Allen D Radant; Larry J Seidman; Larry J Siever; Jeremy M Silverman; William S Stone; Catherine A Sugar; Neal R Swerdlow; Debby W Tsuang; Ming T Tsuang; Bruce I Turetsky; David L Braff
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 4.939

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.