Literature DB >> 28637709

Genome-Wide Association Analyses Based on Broadly Different Specifications for Prior Distributions, Genomic Windows, and Estimation Methods.

Chunyu Chen1, Juan P Steibel2, Robert J Tempelman2.   

Abstract

A currently popular strategy (EMMAX) for genome-wide association (GWA) analysis infers association for the specific marker of interest by treating its effect as fixed while treating all other marker effects as classical Gaussian random effects. It may be more statistically coherent to specify all markers as sharing the same prior distribution, whether that distribution is Gaussian, heavy-tailed (BayesA), or has variable selection specifications based on a mixture of, say, two Gaussian distributions [stochastic search and variable selection (SSVS)]. Furthermore, all such GWA inference should be formally based on posterior probabilities or test statistics as we present here, rather than merely being based on point estimates. We compared these three broad categories of priors within a simulation study to investigate the effects of different degrees of skewness for quantitative trait loci (QTL) effects and numbers of QTL using 43,266 SNP marker genotypes from 922 Duroc-Pietrain F2-cross pigs. Genomic regions were based either on single SNP associations, on nonoverlapping windows of various fixed sizes (0.5-3 Mb), or on adaptively determined windows that cluster the genome into blocks based on linkage disequilibrium. We found that SSVS and BayesA lead to the best receiver operating curve properties in almost all cases. We also evaluated approximate maximum a posteriori (MAP) approaches to BayesA and SSVS as potential computationally feasible alternatives; however, MAP inferences were not promising, particularly due to their sensitivity to starting values. We determined that it is advantageous to use variable selection specifications based on adaptively constructed genomic window lengths for GWA studies.
Copyright © 2017 by the Genetics Society of America.

Entities:  

Keywords:  genome-wide association; hierarchical Bayesian; variable selection

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28637709      PMCID: PMC5560788          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.117.202259

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


  51 in total

1.  Powerful SNP-set analysis for case-control genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Michael C Wu; Peter Kraft; Michael P Epstein; Deanne M Taylor; Stephen J Chanock; David J Hunter; Xihong Lin
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2010-06-11       Impact factor: 11.025

2.  Efficient methods to compute genomic predictions.

Authors:  P M VanRaden
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.034

3.  Accuracy of genomic selection using stochastic search variable selection in Australian Holstein Friesian dairy cattle.

Authors:  Klara L Verbyla; Ben J Hayes; Philip J Bowman; Michael E Goddard
Journal:  Genet Res (Camb)       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.588

4.  FaST linear mixed models for genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Christoph Lippert; Jennifer Listgarten; Ying Liu; Carl M Kadie; Robert I Davidson; David Heckerman
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2011-09-04       Impact factor: 28.547

5.  Application of Bayesian least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) and BayesCπ methods for genomic selection in French Holstein and Montbéliarde breeds.

Authors:  C Colombani; A Legarra; S Fritz; F Guillaume; P Croiseau; V Ducrocq; C Robert-Granié
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2012-11-03       Impact factor: 4.034

Review 6.  Genetics of complex traits: prediction of phenotype, identification of causal polymorphisms and genetic architecture.

Authors:  M E Goddard; K E Kemper; I M MacLeod; A J Chamberlain; B J Hayes
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 5.349

7.  Impact of prior specifications in a shrinkage-inducing Bayesian model for quantitative trait mapping and genomic prediction.

Authors:  Timo Knürr; Esa Läärä; Mikko J Sillanpää
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2013-07-08       Impact factor: 4.297

8.  Effect of the prior distribution of SNP effects on the estimation of total breeding value.

Authors:  Javad Nadaf; Valentina Riggio; Tun-Ping Yu; Ricardo Pong-Wong
Journal:  BMC Proc       Date:  2012-05-21

9.  Mixture models detect large effect QTL better than GBLUP and result in more accurate and persistent predictions.

Authors:  Anna Wolc; Jesus Arango; Petek Settar; Janet E Fulton; Neil P O'Sullivan; Jack C M Dekkers; Rohan Fernando; Dorian J Garrick
Journal:  J Anim Sci Biotechnol       Date:  2016-02-11

Review 10.  A decade of pig genome sequencing: a window on pig domestication and evolution.

Authors:  Martien A M Groenen
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2016-03-29       Impact factor: 4.297

View more
  9 in total

Review 1.  Genome-Wide Association Study Statistical Models: A Review.

Authors:  Mohsen Yoosefzadeh-Najafabadi; Milad Eskandari; François Belzile; Davoud Torkamaneh
Journal:  Methods Mol Biol       Date:  2022

Review 2.  Application of Bayesian genomic prediction methods to genome-wide association analyses.

Authors:  Anna Wolc; Jack C M Dekkers
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 5.100

3.  A certain invariance property of BLUE in a whole-genome regression context.

Authors:  Daniel Gianola; Rohan L Fernando; Dorian J Garrick
Journal:  J Anim Breed Genet       Date:  2019-01-07       Impact factor: 2.380

4.  Marker discovery and associations with β-carotene content in Indian dairy cattle and buffalo breeds.

Authors:  F Bertolini; J Chinchilla-Vargas; J R Khadse; A Juneja; P D Deshpande; K Bhave; V Potdar; P M Kakramkar; A R Karlekar; A B Pande; Rohan L Fernando; M F Rothschild
Journal:  J Dairy Sci       Date:  2019-08-30       Impact factor: 4.034

5.  New insights into the genetic resistance to paratuberculosis in Holstein cattle via single-step genomic evaluation.

Authors:  Marie-Pierre Sanchez; Thierry Tribout; Sébastien Fritz; Raphaël Guatteo; Christine Fourichon; Laurent Schibler; Arnaud Delafosse; Didier Boichard
Journal:  Genet Sel Evol       Date:  2022-10-15       Impact factor: 5.100

6.  GWAS by GBLUP: Single and Multimarker EMMAX and Bayes Factors, with an Example in Detection of a Major Gene for Horse Gait.

Authors:  Andres Legarra; Anne Ricard; Luis Varona
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2018-07-02       Impact factor: 3.154

7.  Model-based clustering for identifying disease-associated SNPs in case-control genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Yan Xu; Li Xing; Jessica Su; Xuekui Zhang; Weiliang Qiu
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-09-23       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  A Multiple-Trait Bayesian Variable Selection Regression Method for Integrating Phenotypic Causal Networks in Genome-Wide Association Studies.

Authors:  Zigui Wang; Deborah Chapman; Gota Morota; Hao Cheng
Journal:  G3 (Bethesda)       Date:  2020-12-03       Impact factor: 3.154

9.  Estimating genetic variance contributed by a quantitative trait locus: A random model approach.

Authors:  Shibo Wang; Fangjie Xie; Shizhong Xu
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2022-03-11       Impact factor: 4.475

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.