Literature DB >> 33720349

Robust, flexible, and scalable tests for Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium across diverse ancestries.

Alan M Kwong1, Thomas W Blackwell1, Jonathon LeFaive1, Mariza de Andrade2, John Barnard3, Kathleen C Barnes4, John Blangero5, Eric Boerwinkle6,7, Esteban G Burchard8,9, Brian E Cade10,11, Daniel I Chasman12, Han Chen6,13, Matthew P Conomos14, L Adrienne Cupples15,16, Patrick T Ellinor17,18, Celeste Eng9, Yan Gao19, Xiuqing Guo20, Marguerite Ryan Irvin21, Tanika N Kelly22, Wonji Kim23, Charles Kooperberg24, Steven A Lubitz17,18, Angel C Y Mak9, Ani W Manichaikul25, Rasika A Mathias26, May E Montasser27, Courtney G Montgomery28, Solomon Musani29, Nicholette D Palmer30, Gina M Peloso15, Dandi Qiao23, Alexander P Reiner24, Dan M Roden31, M Benjamin Shoemaker32, Jennifer A Smith33, Nicholas L Smith34,35,36, Jessica Lasky Su23, Hemant K Tiwari37, Daniel E Weeks38, Scott T Weiss23, Laura J Scott1, Albert V Smith1, Gonçalo R Abecasis1, Michael Boehnke1, Hyun Min Kang1.   

Abstract

Traditional Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) tests (the χ2 test and the exact test) have long been used as a metric for evaluating genotype quality, as technical artifacts leading to incorrect genotype calls often can be identified as deviations from HWE. However, in data sets composed of individuals from diverse ancestries, HWE can be violated even without genotyping error, complicating the use of HWE testing to assess genotype data quality. In this manuscript, we present the Robust Unified Test for HWE (RUTH) to test for HWE while accounting for population structure and genotype uncertainty, and to evaluate the impact of population heterogeneity and genotype uncertainty on the standard HWE tests and alternative methods using simulated and real sequence data sets. Our results demonstrate that ignoring population structure or genotype uncertainty in HWE tests can inflate false-positive rates by many orders of magnitude. Our evaluations demonstrate different tradeoffs between false positives and statistical power across the methods, with RUTH consistently among the best across all evaluations. RUTH is implemented as a practical and scalable software tool to rapidly perform HWE tests across millions of markers and hundreds of thousands of individuals while supporting standard VCF/BCF formats. RUTH is publicly available at https://www.github.com/statgen/ruth.
© The Author(s) 2021. 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:  genotype likelihoods; next-generation sequencing; population structure; principal components analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33720349      PMCID: PMC8128395          DOI: 10.1093/genetics/iyab044

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.402


  37 in total

1.  Principal components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies.

Authors:  Alkes L Price; Nick J Patterson; Robert M Plenge; Michael E Weinblatt; Nancy A Shadick; David Reich
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2006-07-23       Impact factor: 38.330

2.  Common deletion polymorphisms in the human genome.

Authors:  Steven A McCarroll; Tracy N Hadnott; George H Perry; Pardis C Sabeti; Michael C Zody; Jeffrey C Barrett; Stephanie Dallaire; Stacey B Gabriel; Charles Lee; Mark J Daly; David M Altshuler
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 38.330

3.  MENDELIAN PROPORTIONS IN A MIXED POPULATION.

Authors:  G H Hardy
Journal:  Science       Date:  1908-07-10       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  A test of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium in structured populations.

Authors:  Qiuying Sha; Shuanglin Zhang
Journal:  Genet Epidemiol       Date:  2011-08-04       Impact factor: 2.135

5.  Improved whole-chromosome phasing for disease and population genetic studies.

Authors:  Olivier Delaneau; Jean-Francois Zagury; Jonathan Marchini
Journal:  Nat Methods       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 28.547

6.  A method for quantifying differentiation between populations at multi-allelic loci and its implications for investigating identity and paternity.

Authors:  D J Balding; R A Nichols
Journal:  Genetica       Date:  1995       Impact factor: 1.082

Review 7.  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

8.  A global reference for human genetic variation.

Authors:  Adam Auton; Lisa D Brooks; Richard M Durbin; Erik P Garrison; Hyun Min Kang; Jan O Korbel; Jonathan L Marchini; Shane McCarthy; Gil A McVean; Gonçalo R Abecasis
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 49.962

9.  Ancestry-agnostic estimation of DNA sample contamination from sequence reads.

Authors:  Fan Zhang; Matthew Flickinger; Sarah A Gagliano Taliun; Gonçalo R Abecasis; Laura J Scott; Steven A McCaroll; Carlos N Pato; Michael Boehnke; Hyun Min Kang
Journal:  Genome Res       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 9.043

10.  Extending Tests of Hardy-Weinberg Equilibrium to Structured Populations.

Authors:  Wei Hao; John D Storey
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2019-09-19       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.