| Literature DB >> 23665874 |
Daniel James White1, David Bryant, Neil John Gemmell.
Abstract
Empirical proof of human mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) recombination in somatic tissues was obtained in 2004; however, a lack of irrefutable evidence exists for recombination in human mtDNA at the population level. Our inability to demonstrate convincingly a signal of recombination in population data sets of human mtDNA sequence may be due, in part, to the ineffectiveness of current indirect tests. Previously, we tested some well-established indirect tests of recombination (linkage disequilibrium vs. distance using D' and r(2), Homoplasy Test, Pairwise Homoplasy Index, Neighborhood Similarity Score, and Max χ(2)) on sequence data derived from the only empirically confirmed case of human mtDNA recombination thus far and demonstrated that some methods were unable to detect recombination. Here, we assess the performance of these six well-established tests and explore what characteristics specific to human mtDNA sequence may affect their efficacy by simulating sequence under various parameters with levels of recombination (ρ) that vary around an empirically derived estimate for human mtDNA (population parameter ρ = 5.492). No test performed infallibly under any of our scenarios, and error rates varied across tests, whereas detection rates increased substantially with ρ values > 5.492. Under a model of evolution that incorporates parameters specific to human mtDNA, including rate heterogeneity, population expansion, and ρ = 5.492, successful detection rates are limited to a range of 7-70% across tests with an acceptable level of false-positive results: the neighborhood similarity score incompatibility test performed best overall under these parameters. Population growth seems to have the greatest impact on recombination detection probabilities across all models tested, likely due to its impact on sequence diversity. The implications of our findings on our current understanding of mtDNA recombination in humans are discussed.Entities:
Keywords: effectiveness; human; indirect tests; mtDNA; recombination
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2013 PMID: 23665874 PMCID: PMC3704238 DOI: 10.1534/g3.113.006510
Source DB: PubMed Journal: G3 (Bethesda) ISSN: 2160-1836 Impact factor: 3.154
Figure 1Power of six indirect recombination tests at detecting recombination in simulated mtDNA sequence using (A) a simple mode of evolution and (B) a slightly more complex mode of evolution that incorporates mutation rate heterogeneity and population expansion, over a range of recombination values. D′, LD vs. distance using D’; r2, LD vs. distance using r2; HT, Homoplasy Test; HT 3rd, Homoplasy Test using only every third site; PHI p, Pairwise Homoplasy Index using permutations; PHI n, Pairwise Homoplasy Index using a normal approximation; NSS, Neighborhood Similarity Score; MS, Max χ2.
Comparison of recombination detection rates for mtDNA between a simple model of evolution and a model that includes mutation rate heterogeneity but no population growth
| Test | Evolutionary Model | Recombination Parameter | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 2 | 5.492 | 8 | 10 | 12 | |||
| D′ | Simple | 0 | 75 | 95 | 95 | 97 | 100 | |
| rh | 5 | 75 | 96 | 88 | 94 | 97 | 0.519 | |
| r2 | Simple | 8 | 73 | 98 | 99 | 98 | 99 | |
| rh | 3 | 71 | 94 | 99 | 97 | 98 | 0.041 | |
| HT | Simple | 30 | 99 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |
| rh | 42 | 96 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 0.518 | |
| HT 3rd | Simple | 25 | 97 | 99 | 100 | 100 | 100 | |
| rh | 39 | 95 | 99 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 0.447 | |
| PHI p | Simple | 0 | 58 | 96 | 98 | 100 | 100 | |
| rh | 1 | 61 | 95 | 98 | 98 | 100 | 0.822 | |
| PHI n | Simple | 0 | 64 | 93 | 98 | 99 | 100 | |
| rh | 1 | 60 | 96 | 97 | 100 | 99 | 0.872 | |
| NSS | Simple | 1 | 66 | 93 | 96 | 98 | 98 | |
| rh | 3 | 71 | 92 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 0.419 | |
| MS | Simple | 8 | 60 | 81 | 87 | 85 | 87 | |
| rh | 3 | 58 | 77 | 81 | 84 | 85 | 0.009 | |
Values represent the number of 100 samples in which recombination was detected, using a nominal P value of 0.05 to indicate significance. P values are from paired, two-tailed Student’s t-tests. Simple, simple scenario of sequence evolution; rh, evolution of sequences involves mutation rate heterogeneity, but no population growth; D′, LD vs. distance using D′; r2, LD vs. distance using r2; HT, Homoplasy Test; HT 3rd, Homoplasy Test using only every third site; PHI p, Pairwise Homoplasy Index using permutations; PHI n, Pairwise Homoplasy Index using a normal approximation; NSS, Neighborhood Similarity Score; MS, Max χ2.
Figure 2P value frequency distribution at ρ = 0 across the six indirect tests for the (A) simple model of sequence evolution (no rate heterogeneity or population growth) and (B) slightly more complex model of sequence evolution that incorporates mutation rate heterogeneity and population expansion.