Literature DB >> 28592493

Back to the Future: Multiparent Populations Provide the Key to Unlocking the Genetic Basis of Complex Traits.

Dirk-Jan de Koning1, Lauren M McIntyre2.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28592493      PMCID: PMC5494722          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.117.203265

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


× No keyword cloud information.
In the past decade, the ability to generate whole-genome sequences has provided geneticists with a view of the astonishing breadth of genetic variation. This, in theory, means we should be able to identify the specific differences in DNA sequence that lead to an inherited phenotype, including disease states. But this wealth of new information has revealed perhaps the most fundamental challenge for geneticists since Mendel. While we understand that phenotypes are influenced by genetic variation, we do not yet know how to interpret individual genome sequences, and, therefore, we cannot predict which genetic variants are linked to which phenotypes. Indeed, the term “missing heritability” was coined to highlight the fact that in natural populations the genes or genetic elements associated with complex traits explain only a small proportion of the phenotypic variation in these traits. In stark contrast, controlled crosses of model organisms have generated a wealth of information about the genetic basis of phenotypes. From broad associations of genomic regions with traits, to individual polymorphisms that act by well understood mechanisms, geneticists have been remarkably successful in revealing the impact of genetic variation on phenotype. Applications as diverse as targeted drug therapy and dramatic improvements in agricultural output have been enabled by our understanding of genetics. But it remains a significant challenge to transfer this understanding to natural populations. To bridge the gap between natural populations and experimental systems, experimental systems need to incorporate more of the complexity of natural populations. This has given rise to a burst of creativity in the design of genetic reference populations. The basic idea is simple: combine the strength of the experimental system, where the genetic composition can be replicated, with the genetic diversity of the target population. Rather than choose two inbred lines or two phenotypically divergent individuals as founders of a genetic reference panel (recombinant inbreds), choose eight, or 25. Using multiple lines as founders of a set of inbred lines whose haplotypes can be replicated has been referred to as Interconnected populations multi-parent, advanced-generation inter-cross design, Complex Cross, and multi-parental RIL. We are choosing to refer to this broad set of genetic reference panels as multi-parent populations (MPP). Fifteen years ago, the mouse genetics community embraced the challenge of creating strains that would represent the diversity of natural variation in mice, thereby improving the utility of the organism for exploring complex human disease. Eight founder mouse strains were selected, and offspring populations with all eight haplotypes were developed in a funnel mating scheme (Figure 1, Collaborative Cross Consortium 2012). The first set of papers describing these strains was published in GENETICS and G3 in 2012 (http://www.g3journal.org/content/mpp_mouse#cc). Systematic monitoring of progress with the mouse collaborative cross has provided a window into the impact of drift on the genomes (Srivastava ), a startling insight into the genetic basis of male sterility (Odet ; Shorter ), the impact of structural variation (Morgan ), and a new method for estimating haplotypes and preserving uncertainty (Oreper ). The resources developed for mouse enable detection of many types of loci, from those associated with SARS (Gralinski ) and West Nile (Green ) virus infections to those associated with fertility (Shorter ) allergens Kelada (2016). Morgan and Dumont also provide insights into genome structure. This large effort in mouse is matched by ambitious projects on a plethora of organisms. MPPs have been created in plants [Arabidopsis (Kover ), Maize (Yu ), wheat (Mackay et al. 2014), sunflower (Bowers ), and other crops (Brenton ; Nice )], in animals [Drosophila (Mackay ; King )], and in yeast (Cubillos ). In 2014, we highlighted the diversity of MPPs in GENETICS and G3 with articles on maize, sorghum, wheat, triticale, Arabidopsis, Drosophila, and mouse (http://www.genetics.org/content/multiparental_populations). These issues of GENETICS and G3 feature MPPs of sorghum (Bouchet ), strawberry (Mangandi ), rice (Raghavan ), oil palm (Tisné ), yeast (Cubillos ), Drosophila (King and Long 2017; Najarro ; Stanley ) and mouse (Gralinski ; Green ; Morgan ; Oreper ; Shorter ; Srivastava ; Tyler ). GENETICS and G3 are committed to fostering discussion about the genetic inferences made from MPPs, as well as the best ways to analyze the data, and to extending inferences to natural populations. Projects that rely on a common set of germplasm (or set of strains) rely on data sharing. One of the benefits to working with a reference panel is the ability to leverage data collected in different ways, for different purposes. Our journals have long had policies for reagent and data sharing that reflect the values of our community, and this is evident in these articles on MPPs. Each MPP paper in these issues has the Data availability section that is standard for all GSA publications, as well as a one-page guide to the data that makes it easier to browse the data behind the papers. In recognition of the ongoing importance of MPPs for understanding fundamental questions in genetics, G3 and GENETICS have designed a special web resource for MPPs. Papers are organized in a special collections page, with subheaders that help navigate the growing literature. Our journals have long partnered with model organism databases FlyBase, SGD, WormBase, and others, and we now incorporate news, blogs, tips, and protocols directly on our webpage to help geneticists interested in MPPs get a handle on this topic. Tweet your insights to #MPP #GSAjournals, and use MPP as a keyword of your MPP papers to enable text search engines to collate this literature. The GSA journals are committed to creating a community platform that spans species and disciplines, yet remains focused on common research questions. We thank the authors, referees and editors for making this resource a reality!
  26 in total

1.  Male Infertility Is Responsible for Nearly Half of the Extinction Observed in the Mouse Collaborative Cross.

Authors:  John R Shorter; Fanny Odet; David L Aylor; Wenqi Pan; Chia-Yu Kao; Chen-Ping Fu; Andrew P Morgan; Seth Greenstein; Timothy A Bell; Alicia M Stevans; Ryan W Feathers; Sunny Patel; Sarah E Cates; Ginger D Shaw; Darla R Miller; Elissa J Chesler; Leonard McMillian; Deborah A O'Brien; Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  The Evolutionary Fates of a Large Segmental Duplication in Mouse.

Authors:  Andrew P Morgan; J Matthew Holt; Rachel C McMullan; Timothy A Bell; Amelia M-F Clayshulte; John P Didion; Liran Yadgary; David Thybert; Duncan T Odom; Paul Flicek; Leonard McMillan; Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-07-02       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  The Drosophila melanogaster Genetic Reference Panel.

Authors:  Trudy F C Mackay; Stephen Richards; Eric A Stone; Antonio Barbadilla; Julien F Ayroles; Dianhui Zhu; Sònia Casillas; Yi Han; Michael M Magwire; Julie M Cridland; Mark F Richardson; Robert R H Anholt; Maite Barrón; Crystal Bess; Kerstin Petra Blankenburg; Mary Anna Carbone; David Castellano; Lesley Chaboub; Laura Duncan; Zeke Harris; Mehwish Javaid; Joy Christina Jayaseelan; Shalini N Jhangiani; Katherine W Jordan; Fremiet Lara; Faye Lawrence; Sandra L Lee; Pablo Librado; Raquel S Linheiro; Richard F Lyman; Aaron J Mackey; Mala Munidasa; Donna Marie Muzny; Lynne Nazareth; Irene Newsham; Lora Perales; Ling-Ling Pu; Carson Qu; Miquel Ràmia; Jeffrey G Reid; Stephanie M Rollmann; Julio Rozas; Nehad Saada; Lavanya Turlapati; Kim C Worley; Yuan-Qing Wu; Akihiko Yamamoto; Yiming Zhu; Casey M Bergman; Kevin R Thornton; David Mittelman; Richard A Gibbs
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2012-02-08       Impact factor: 49.962

4.  Development of a 10,000 locus genetic map of the sunflower genome based on multiple crosses.

Authors:  John E Bowers; Eleni Bachlava; Robert L Brunick; Loren H Rieseberg; Steven J Knapp; John M Burke
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2012-07-01       Impact factor: 3.154

5.  A Genomic Resource for the Development, Improvement, and Exploitation of Sorghum for Bioenergy.

Authors:  Zachary W Brenton; Elizabeth A Cooper; Mathew T Myers; Richard E Boyles; Nadia Shakoor; Kelsey J Zielinski; Bradley L Rauh; William C Bridges; Geoffrey P Morris; Stephen Kresovich
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2016-06-29       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Inbred Strain Variant Database (ISVdb): A Repository for Probabilistically Informed Sequence Differences Among the Collaborative Cross Strains and Their Founders.

Authors:  Daniel Oreper; Yanwei Cai; Lisa M Tarantino; Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena; William Valdar
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 3.154

7.  Increased Power To Dissect Adaptive Traits in Global Sorghum Diversity Using a Nested Association Mapping Population.

Authors:  Sophie Bouchet; Marcus O Olatoye; Sandeep R Marla; Ramasamy Perumal; Tesfaye Tesso; Jianming Yu; Mitch Tuinstra; Geoffrey P Morris
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.562

8.  Allelic Variation in the Toll-Like Receptor Adaptor Protein Ticam2 Contributes to SARS-Coronavirus Pathogenesis in Mice.

Authors:  Lisa E Gralinski; Vineet D Menachery; Andrew P Morgan; Allison L Totura; Anne Beall; Jacob Kocher; Jessica Plante; D Corinne Harrison-Shostak; Alexandra Schäfer; Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena; Martin T Ferris; Ralph S Baric
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2017-06-07       Impact factor: 3.154

9.  Genomes of the Mouse Collaborative Cross.

Authors:  Anuj Srivastava; Andrew P Morgan; Maya L Najarian; Vishal Kumar Sarsani; J Sebastian Sigmon; John R Shorter; Anwica Kashfeen; Rachel C McMullan; Lucy H Williams; Paola Giusti-Rodríguez; Martin T Ferris; Patrick Sullivan; Pablo Hock; Darla R Miller; Timothy A Bell; Leonard McMillan; Gary A Churchill; Fernando Pardo-Manuel de Villena
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 4.562

10.  High-resolution mapping of complex traits with a four-parent advanced intercross yeast population.

Authors:  Francisco A Cubillos; Leopold Parts; Francisco Salinas; Anders Bergström; Eugenio Scovacricchi; Amin Zia; Christopher J R Illingworth; Ville Mustonen; Sebastian Ibstedt; Jonas Warringer; Edward J Louis; Richard Durbin; Gianni Liti
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 4.562

View more
  9 in total

1.  The utility of a closed breeding colony of Peromyscus leucopus for dissecting complex traits.

Authors:  Phillip N Long; Vanessa J Cook; Arundhati Majumder; Alan G Barbour; Anthony D Long
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 4.402

2.  A novel high-density grapevine (Vitis vinifera L.) integrated linkage map using GBS in a half-diallel population.

Authors:  Javier Tello; Catherine Roux; Hajar Chouiki; Valérie Laucou; Gautier Sarah; Audrey Weber; Sylvain Santoni; Timothée Flutre; Thierry Pons; Patrice This; Jean-Pierre Péros; Agnès Doligez
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2019-05-03       Impact factor: 5.699

3.  The evolutionary potential of diet-dependent effects on lifespan and fecundity in a multi-parental population of Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Enoch Ng'oma; Wilton Fidelis; Kevin M Middleton; Elizabeth G King
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 3.821

4.  A generic hidden Markov model for multiparent populations.

Authors:  Karl W Broman
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2022-02-04       Impact factor: 3.542

5.  Joint Analysis of Strain and Parent-of-Origin Effects for Recombinant Inbred Intercrosses Generated from Multiparent Populations with the Collaborative Cross as an Example.

Authors:  Yanyan Liu; Sican Xiong; Wei Sun; Fei Zou
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 3.154

6.  Natural genetic variation as a tool for discovery in Caenorhabditis nematodes.

Authors:  Erik C Andersen; Matthew V Rockman
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Genetic and environmental perturbations lead to regulatory decoherence.

Authors:  Amanda Lea; Meena Subramaniam; Noah Zaitlen; Julien F Ayroles; Arthur Ko; Terho Lehtimäki; Emma Raitoharju; Mika Kähönen; Ilkka Seppälä; Nina Mononen; Olli T Raitakari; Mika Ala-Korpela; Päivi Pajukanta
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 8.140

8.  Two Synthetic 18-Way Outcrossed Populations of Diploid Budding Yeast with Utility for Complex Trait Dissection.

Authors:  Robert A Linder; Arundhati Majumder; Mahul Chakraborty; Anthony Long
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2020-04-02       Impact factor: 4.562

9.  Inbred or Outbred? Genetic Diversity in Laboratory Rodent Colonies.

Authors:  Thomas D Brekke; Katherine A Steele; John F Mulley
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2018-02-02       Impact factor: 3.154

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.