Literature DB >> 33683359

Distinct error rates for reference and nonreference genotypes estimated by pedigree analysis.

Richard J Wang1, Predrag Radivojac2, Matthew W Hahn1,3.   

Abstract

Errors in genotype calling can have perverse effects on genetic analyses, confounding association studies, and obscuring rare variants. Analyses now routinely incorporate error rates to control for spurious findings. However, reliable estimates of the error rate can be difficult to obtain because of their variance between studies. Most studies also report only a single estimate of the error rate even though genotypes can be miscalled in more than one way. Here, we report a method for estimating the rates at which different types of genotyping errors occur at biallelic loci using pedigree information. Our method identifies potential genotyping errors by exploiting instances where the haplotypic phase has not been faithfully transmitted. The expected frequency of inconsistent phase depends on the combination of genotypes in a pedigree and the probability of miscalling each genotype. We develop a model that uses the differences in these frequencies to estimate rates for different types of genotype error. Simulations show that our method accurately estimates these error rates in a variety of scenarios. We apply this method to a dataset from the whole-genome sequencing of owl monkeys (Aotus nancymaae) in three-generation pedigrees. We find significant differences between estimates for different types of genotyping error, with the most common being homozygous reference sites miscalled as heterozygous and vice versa. The approach we describe is applicable to any set of genotypes where haplotypic phase can reliably be called and should prove useful in helping to control for false discoveries.
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Genetics Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  genotyping error rate; haplotype phase; pedigree analysis; whole-genome sequencing

Year:  2021        PMID: 33683359      PMCID: PMC8045694          DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyaa014

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


  50 in total

1.  Characterization of human crossover interference.

Authors:  K W Broman; J L Weber
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2000-05-08       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 2.  Genotyping errors: causes, consequences and solutions.

Authors:  François Pompanon; Aurélie Bonin; Eva Bellemain; Pierre Taberlet
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 53.242

3.  Genetic mapping in the presence of genotyping errors.

Authors:  Dustin A Cartwright; Michela Troggio; Riccardo Velasco; Alexander Gutin
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2007-02-04       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  The effects of SNP genotyping errors on the power of the Cochran-Armitage linear trend test for case/control association studies.

Authors:  Kwangmi Ahn; Chad Haynes; Wonkuk Kim; Rose St Fleur; Derek Gordon; Stephen J Finch
Journal:  Ann Hum Genet       Date:  2006-11-10       Impact factor: 1.670

5.  Chromosomal haplotypes by genetic phasing of human families.

Authors:  Jared C Roach; Gustavo Glusman; Robert Hubley; Stephen Z Montsaroff; Alisha K Holloway; Denise E Mauldin; Deepak Srivastava; Vidu Garg; Katherine S Pollard; David J Galas; Leroy Hood; Arian F A Smit
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 11.025

Review 6.  Genotype and SNP calling from next-generation sequencing data.

Authors:  Rasmus Nielsen; Joshua S Paul; Anders Albrechtsen; Yun S Song
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 53.242

7.  Analysis of error profiles in deep next-generation sequencing data.

Authors:  Xiaotu Ma; Ying Shao; Liqing Tian; Diane A Flasch; Heather L Mulder; Michael N Edmonson; Yu Liu; Xiang Chen; Scott Newman; Joy Nakitandwe; Yongjin Li; Benshang Li; Shuhong Shen; Zhaoming Wang; Sheila Shurtleff; Leslie L Robison; Shawn Levy; John Easton; Jinghui Zhang
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2019-03-14       Impact factor: 13.583

8.  A framework for the detection of de novo mutations in family-based sequencing data.

Authors:  Laurent C Francioli; Mircea Cretu-Stancu; Kiran V Garimella; Menachem Fromer; Wigard P Kloosterman; Kaitlin E Samocha; Benjamin M Neale; Mark J Daly; Eric Banks; Mark A DePristo; Paul Iw de Bakker
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 4.246

9.  Influence of genotyping error in linkage mapping for complex traits--an analytic study.

Authors:  Jérémie J P Lebrec; Hein Putter; Jeanine J Houwing-Duistermaat; Hans C van Houwelingen
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2008-08-25       Impact factor: 2.797

10.  Broad-scale recombination patterns underlying proper disjunction in humans.

Authors:  Adi Fledel-Alon; Daniel J Wilson; Karl Broman; Xiaoquan Wen; Carole Ober; Graham Coop; Molly Przeworski
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2009-09-18       Impact factor: 5.917

View more
  4 in total

1.  P-smoother: efficient PBWT smoothing of large haplotype panels.

Authors:  William Yue; Ardalan Naseri; Victor Wang; Pramesh Shakya; Shaojie Zhang; Degui Zhi
Journal:  Bioinform Adv       Date:  2022-06-20

2.  Genotype error biases trio-based estimates of haplotype phase accuracy.

Authors:  Brian L Browning; Sharon R Browning
Journal:  Am J Hum Genet       Date:  2022-06-02       Impact factor: 11.043

3.  The Mutationathon highlights the importance of reaching standardization in estimates of pedigree-based germline mutation rates.

Authors:  Lucie A Bergeron; Søren Besenbacher; Tychele Turner; Cyril J Versoza; Richard J Wang; Alivia Lee Price; Ellie Armstrong; Meritxell Riera; Jedidiah Carlson; Hwei-Yen Chen; Matthew W Hahn; Kelley Harris; April Snøfrid Kleppe; Elora H López-Nandam; Priya Moorjani; Susanne P Pfeifer; George P Tiley; Anne D Yoder; Guojie Zhang; Mikkel H Schierup
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 8.140

4.  De novo Mutations in Domestic Cat are Consistent with an Effect of Reproductive Longevity on Both the Rate and Spectrum of Mutations.

Authors:  Richard J Wang; Muthuswamy Raveendran; R Alan Harris; William J Murphy; Leslie A Lyons; Jeffrey Rogers; Matthew W Hahn
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2022-07-02       Impact factor: 8.800

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.