Literature DB >> 25112184

Value of Mendelian laws of segregation in families: data quality control, imputation, and beyond.

Elizabeth M Blue1, Lei Sun, Nathan L Tintle, Ellen M Wijsman.   

Abstract

When analyzing family data, we dream of perfectly informative data, even whole-genome sequences (WGSs) for all family members. Reality intervenes, and we find that next-generation sequencing (NGS) data have errors and are often too expensive or impossible to collect on everyone. The Genetic Analysis Workshop 18 working groups on quality control and dropping WGSs through families using a genome-wide association framework focused on finding, correcting, and using errors within the available sequence and family data, developing methods to infer and analyze missing sequence data among relatives, and testing for linkage and association with simulated blood pressure. We found that single-nucleotide polymorphisms, NGS data, and imputed data are generally concordant but that errors are particularly likely at rare variants, for homozygous genotypes, within regions with repeated sequences or structural variants, and within sequence data imputed from unrelated individuals. Admixture complicated identification of cryptic relatedness, but information from Mendelian transmission improved error detection and provided an estimate of the de novo mutation rate. Computationally, fast rule-based imputation was accurate but could not cover as many loci or subjects as more computationally demanding probability-based methods. Incorporating population-level data into pedigree-based imputation methods improved results. Observed data outperformed imputed data in association testing, but imputed data were also useful. We discuss the strengths and weaknesses of existing methods and suggest possible future directions, such as improving communication between data collectors and data analysts, establishing thresholds for and improving imputation quality, and incorporating error into imputation and analytical models.
© 2014 WILEY PERIODICALS, INC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  de novo mutation; inference; next-generation sequence data; power; type I error

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25112184      PMCID: PMC4135526          DOI: 10.1002/gepi.21821

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Epidemiol        ISSN: 0741-0395            Impact factor:   2.135


  51 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.  Ignoring linkage disequilibrium among tightly linked markers induces false-positive evidence of linkage for affected sib pair analysis.

Authors:  Qiqing Huang; Sanjay Shete; Christopher I Amos
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2004-10-18       Impact factor: 11.025

3.  Genotyping errors, pedigree errors, and missing data.

Authors:  Anthony L Hinrichs; Brian K Suarez
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.135

Review 4.  Factors affecting statistical power in the detection of genetic association.

Authors:  Derek Gordon; Stephen J Finch
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 14.808

5.  GIGI: an approach to effective imputation of dense genotypes on large pedigrees.

Authors:  Charles Y K Cheung; Elizabeth A Thompson; Ellen M Wijsman
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 11.025

6.  Confounded by sequencing depth in association studies of rare alleles.

Authors:  Chad Garner
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 2.135

7.  Quality control and quality assurance in genotypic data for genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Cathy C Laurie; Kimberly F Doheny; Daniel B Mirel; Elizabeth W Pugh; Laura J Bierut; Tushar Bhangale; Frederick Boehm; Neil E Caporaso; Marilyn C Cornelis; Howard J Edenberg; Stacy B Gabriel; Emily L Harris; Frank B Hu; Kevin B Jacobs; Peter Kraft; Maria Teresa Landi; Thomas Lumley; Teri A Manolio; Caitlin McHugh; Ian Painter; Justin Paschall; John P Rice; Kenneth M Rice; Xiuwen Zheng; Bruce S Weir
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 2.135

8.  A new statistic to evaluate imputation reliability.

Authors:  Peng Lin; Sarah M Hartz; Zhehao Zhang; Scott F Saccone; Jia Wang; Jay A Tischfield; Howard J Edenberg; John R Kramer; Alison M Goate; Laura J Bierut; John P Rice
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-03-15       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Identity-by-descent graphs offer a flexible framework for imputation and both linkage and association analyses.

Authors:  Elizabeth Marchani Blue; Charles Yk Cheung; Christopher G Glazner; Matthew P Conomos; Steven M Lewis; Serge Sverdlov; Timothy Thornton; Ellen M Wijsman
Journal:  BMC Proc       Date:  2014-06-17

10.  Designing genome-wide association studies: sample size, power, imputation, and the choice of genotyping chip.

Authors:  Chris C A Spencer; Zhan Su; Peter Donnelly; Jonathan Marchini
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2009-05-15       Impact factor: 5.917

View more
  2 in total

1.  Rapid Detection of Rare Deleterious Variants by Next Generation Sequencing with Optional Microarray SNP Genotype Data.

Authors:  Christopher M Watson; Laura A Crinnion; Juliana Gurgel-Gianetti; Sally M Harrison; Catherine Daly; Agne Antanavicuite; Carolina Lascelles; Alexander F Markham; Sergio D J Pena; David T Bonthron; Ian M Carr
Journal:  Hum Mutat       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 4.878

2.  Mendelian Inconsistent Signatures from 1314 Ancestrally Diverse Family Trios Distinguish Biological Variation from Sequencing Error.

Authors:  Prachi Kothiyal; Wendy S W Wong; Dale L Bodian; John E Niederhuber
Journal:  J Comput Biol       Date:  2019-04-03       Impact factor: 1.479

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.