Literature DB >> 22958648

Estimation of genotyping error rate from repeat genotyping, unintentional recaptures and known parent-offspring comparisons in 16 microsatellite loci for brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus).

Maureen A Hess1, James G Rhydderch, Larry L LeClair, Raymond M Buckley, Mitsuhiro Kawase, Lorenz Hauser.   

Abstract

Genotyping errors are present in almost all genetic data and can affect biological conclusions of a study, particularly for studies based on individual identification and parentage. Many statistical approaches can incorporate genotyping errors, but usually need accurate estimates of error rates. Here, we used a new microsatellite data set developed for brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus) to estimate genotyping error using three approaches: (i) repeat genotyping 5% of samples, (ii) comparing unintentionally recaptured individuals and (iii) Mendelian inheritance error checking for known parent-offspring pairs. In each data set, we quantified genotyping error rate per allele due to allele drop-out and false alleles. Genotyping error rate per locus revealed an average overall genotyping error rate by direct count of 0.3%, 1.5% and 1.7% (0.002, 0.007 and 0.008 per allele error rate) from replicate genotypes, known parent-offspring pairs and unintentionally recaptured individuals, respectively. By direct-count error estimates, the recapture and known parent-offspring data sets revealed an error rate four times greater than estimated using repeat genotypes. There was no evidence of correlation between error rates and locus variability for all three data sets, and errors appeared to occur randomly over loci in the repeat genotypes, but not in recaptures and parent-offspring comparisons. Furthermore, there was no correlation in locus-specific error rates between any two of the three data sets. Our data suggest that repeat genotyping may underestimate true error rates and may not estimate locus-specific error rates accurately. We therefore suggest using methods for error estimation that correspond to the overall aim of the study (e.g. known parent-offspring comparisons in parentage studies).
© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22958648     DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.12002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour        ISSN: 1755-098X            Impact factor:   7.090


  5 in total

1.  Regional Genetic Structure and Environmental Variables Influence our Conservation Approach for Feather Heads (Ptilotus macrocephalus).

Authors:  Collin W Ahrens; Elizabeth A James
Journal:  J Hered       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 2.645

2.  Sexual selection leads to a tenfold difference in reproductive success of alternative reproductive tactics in male Atlantic salmon.

Authors:  Cédric Tentelier; Olivier Lepais; Nicolas Larranaga; Aurélie Manicki; Frédéric Lange; Jacques Rives
Journal:  Naturwissenschaften       Date:  2016-05-23

Review 3.  Challenges in analysis and interpretation of microsatellite data for population genetic studies.

Authors:  Alexander I Putman; Ignazio Carbone
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2014-10-30       Impact factor: 2.912

4.  Rules for resolving Mendelian inconsistencies in nuclear pedigrees typed for two-allele markers.

Authors:  Sajjad Ahmad Khan; Sadaf Manzoor; Amjad Ali; Dost Muhammad Khan; Umair Khalil
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-02       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Genotyping-by-sequencing of genome-wide microsatellite loci reveals fine-scale harvest composition in a coastal Atlantic salmon fishery.

Authors:  Ian R Bradbury; Brendan F Wringe; Beth Watson; Ian Paterson; John Horne; Robert Beiko; Sarah J Lehnert; Marie Clément; Eric C Anderson; Nicholas W Jeffery; Steven Duffy; Emma Sylvester; Martha Robertson; Paul Bentzen
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2018-03-11       Impact factor: 5.183

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.