Literature DB >> 21522168

A new likelihood estimator and its comparison with moment estimators of individual genome-wide diversity.

J Wang1.   

Abstract

The inbreeding coefficient of an individual, F, is one of the central parameters in population genetics theory. It has found important applications in evolutionary biology, conservation and ecology, such as the study of inbreeding depression. In the absence of detailed and reliable pedigree records, researchers have developed quite a few estimators to estimate F or the genome-wide homozygosity from genetic marker data. The statistical properties and comparative performances of these metrics are rarely known, however, which impedes an informed choice of the most appropriate one in practical applications. In this investigation, I propose a new likelihood F estimator that makes efficient use of marker information and takes into account of allelic dropouts, null alleles and prior knowledge of inbreeding. I compare the likelihood estimator with three moment estimators of F and three metrics of genomic homozygosity (or heterozygosity) by analysing both simulated and empirical datasets. It is shown that the likelihood estimator invariably outperforms the other estimators and metrics across all datasets analysed. For a typical dataset in heterozygosity-fitness correlation studies involving 10-20 microsatellites and 50 individuals, the correlation between the likelihood estimator and F (the simulated true inbreeding coefficient) is about 8 ∼ 35% higher than that between the moment estimators and F. A frequently applied metric, multilocus heterozygosity (MLH), and an F estimator based on the consideration of the proportion of alleles in homozygous conditions, [F R'), are shown to have particularly poor performances. The low correlation between MLH and fitness traits, which is widely observed in numerous empirical studies, might be partially caused by the adoption of this inefficient estimator of genomic inbreeding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21522168      PMCID: PMC3199925          DOI: 10.1038/hdy.2011.30

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)        ISSN: 0018-067X            Impact factor:   3.821


  28 in total

1.  Microsatellite measures of inbreeding: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  D W Coltman; J Slate
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.694

2.  The genetical structure of populations.

Authors:  S WRIGHT
Journal:  Ann Eugen       Date:  1951-03

3.  How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies.

Authors:  A Bonin; E Bellemain; P Bronken Eidesen; F Pompanon; C Brochmann; P Taberlet
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2004-11       Impact factor: 6.185

4.  The distribution of the number of heterozygous Loci in an individual in natural populations.

Authors:  R Chakraborty
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1981-06       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Parentage and sibship inference from multilocus genotype data under polygamy.

Authors:  J Wang; A W Santure
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-02-16       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Extra-pair paternity in birds: explaining variation between species and populations.

Authors:  M Petrie; B Kempenaers
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  1998-02-01       Impact factor: 17.712

7.  Estimation of inbreeding coefficients from genotypic data on multiple alleles, and application to estimation of clonality in malaria parasites.

Authors:  W G Hill; H A Babiker; L C Ranford-Cartwright; D Walliker
Journal:  Genet Res       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 1.588

8.  The costs of human inbreeding and their implications for variations at the DNA level.

Authors:  A H Bittles; J V Neel
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 38.330

9.  Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations.

Authors:  T C Marshall; J Slate; L E Kruuk; J M Pemberton
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 6.185

10.  Estimating human inbreeding coefficients: comparison of genealogical and marker heterozygosity approaches.

Authors:  A D Carothers; I Rudan; I Kolcic; O Polasek; C Hayward; A F Wright; H Campbell; P Teague; N D Hastie; J L Weber
Journal:  Ann Hum Genet       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 1.670

View more
  4 in total

1.  Low incidence of inbreeding in a long-lived primate population isolated for 75 years.

Authors:  Anja Widdig; Laura Muniz; Mirjam Minkner; Yvonne Barth; Stefanie Bley; Angelina Ruiz-Lambides; Olaf Junge; Roger Mundry; Lars Kulik
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2016-12-09       Impact factor: 2.980

2.  Genetic rescue, the greater prairie chicken and the problem of conservation reliance in the Anthropocene.

Authors:  S M Mussmann; M R Douglas; W J B Anthonysamy; M A Davis; S A Simpson; W Louis; M E Douglas
Journal:  R Soc Open Sci       Date:  2017-02-22       Impact factor: 2.963

3.  Observed and expected frequencies of structural hemoglobin variants in newborn screening surveys in Africa and the Middle East: deviations from Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.

Authors:  Frédéric B Piel; Thomas V Adamkiewicz; Djesika Amendah; Thomas N Williams; Sunetra Gupta; Scott D Grosse
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2015-12-03       Impact factor: 8.822

4.  Multi-targeted management of upland game birds at the agroecosystem interface in midwestern North America.

Authors:  Marlis R Douglas; Whitney J B Anthonysamy; Steven M Mussmann; Mark A Davis; Wade Louis; Michael E Douglas
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-04-27       Impact factor: 3.240

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.