| Literature DB >> 35692824 |
Yanfang Liu1,2, Wei Cui1, Xiaoye Jin3, Kang Wang4, Shuyan Mei1, Xingkai Zheng4, Bofeng Zhu1,5,6.
Abstract
The genetic information of the Chinese Tibetan group has been a long-standing research hotspot among population geneticists and archaeologists. Herein, 309 unrelated individuals from two Tibetan groups living in Qinghai Province, China (CTQ), and Tibet Autonomous Region, China (CTT), were successfully genotyped using a new homemade six-color fluorescence multiplex panel, which contained 59 autosomal deletion/insertion polymorphisms (au-DIPs), two mini short tandem repeats (miniSTRs), two Y-chromosomal DIPs, and one Amelogenin. The cumulative probability of matching and combined power of exclusion values for this new panel in CTQ and CTT groups were 1.9253E-27 and 0.99999729, as well as 1.5061E-26 and 0.99999895, respectively. Subsequently, comprehensive population genetic analyses of Tibetan groups and reference populations were carried out based on the 59 au-DIPs. The multitudinous statistical analysis results supported that Tibetan groups have close genetic affinities with East Asian populations. These findings showed that this homemade system would be a powerful tool for forensic individual identification and paternity testing in Chinese Tibetan groups and give us an important insight for further perfecting the genetic landscape of Tibetan groups.Entities:
Keywords: Tibetan group; deletion/insertion polymorphisms; forensic efficiency estimation; genetic architecture dissection; population genetics
Year: 2022 PMID: 35692824 PMCID: PMC9184685 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2022.880346
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Genet ISSN: 1664-8021 Impact factor: 4.772
Statistical analysis information for forensic parameters and population genetic analyses.
| Statistical parameter | Software | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Exact tests of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium (HWE- | STRAF tool ( | Sample representativeness, locus independence testing, genetic polymorphism, and forensic parameter analysis |
| Linkage disequilibrium (LD) analysis | - | - |
| Allele frequency | - | - |
| Power of exclusion (PE) | - | - |
| Power of discrimination (PD) | - | - |
| Probability of matching (PM) | - | - |
| Polymorphic information content (PIC) | - | - |
| Observed heterozygosity (Hobs) | - | - |
| Allele frequency heatmap | TBtools version 0.665 ( | Insertion allele frequency distribution characteristics of the 59 au-DIPs in the CTQ and CTT groups, and the other 26 reference populations |
|
| Arlequin version 3.5 ( | Population differentiation among the two studied Tibetan groups and other 26 reference populations |
|
| DISPAN program |
|
| Phylogenetic tree reconstructions | MEGA version 7.0 ( | Rooted evolutionary tree, which was built based on the |
| Phylip version 3.697 ( | Unrooted evolutionary tree, namely, radiation tree, which was established based on the allelic frequency data using the neighbor-joining method | |
| Principal component analyses (PCA) |
| Population level PCA based on the allele frequencies of the same loci |
| Origin 2021 | Individual level PCA based on the allelic genotyping raw data | |
|
| Contribution quality correlation circle of the locus in the corresponding PCA plots | |
| Population genetic structure analyses | STRUCTURE version 2.3.4 ( | Each |
| CLUMPP version 1.1.2 ( | The ancestor component bar graph drawing after the population genetic structure analysis | |
| Distruct version 1.1 ( | - | |
| Structure Harvester program ( | The optimum | |
| Population-specific divergence (PSD) | Snipper version 2.5 | The accumulated PSD values of all loci in distinguishing different geographical region populations |
| Informativeness for assignment ( | Infocalc version 1.1 | Determining the level of information about individual ancestry provided by each locus, and the locus-by-locus AMOVA |
FIGURE 1Forensic parameters in the CTQ and CTT groups. (A) Bar chart of p-value distributions of pairwise linkage disequilibrium tests at the 59 au-DIPs and two miniSTRs. (B) Half violin of some forensic parameters for the 59 au-DIPs and two miniSTRs. I, insertion allele frequencies; HWE-p, exact tests of Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium; PE, power of exclusion; PD, power of discrimination; PM, probability of matching; PIC, polymorphic information content; Hobs, observed heterozygosity. (C) Half horizontal bar of insertion allele frequencies at the 59 au-DIPs.
FIGURE 2Distribution heatmaps of the pairwise F ST values (the upper right part) and D A values (the bottom left part) among the CTQ and CTT groups and other 26 comparison populations. CTQ, Tibetan in Qinghai Province, China (n = 155); CTT, Tibetan in Tibet Autonomous Region, China (n = 154); CDX, Chinese Dai in Xishuangbanna, China (n = 93); CHB, Han Chinese in Beijing, China (n = 103); CHS, Southern Han Chinese, China (n = 105); KHV, Kinh in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (n = 99); JPT, Japanese in Tokyo, Japan (n = 104); PJL, Punjabi in Lahore, Pakistan (n = 96); GIH, Gujarati Indian in Houston, TX (n = 103); ITU, Indian Telugu in the United Kingdom (n = 102); STU, Sri Lankan Tamil in the United Kingdom (n = 102); BEB, Bengali in Bangladesh (n = 86); CLM, Colombian in Medellin, Colombia (n = 94); MXL, Mexican Ancestry in Los Angeles, California (n = 64); PEL, Peruvian in Lima, Peru (n = 85); PUR, Puerto Rican in Puerto Rico (n = 104); CEU, Utah residents with Northern and Western European ancestry (n = 99); FIN, Finnish in Finland (n = 99); GBR, British in England and Scotland (n = 91); IBS, Iberian populations in Spain (n = 107); TSI, Toscani in Italy (n = 107); ACB, African Caribbean in Barbados (n = 96); ASW, African Ancestry in Southwest US (n = 61); ESN, Esan in Nigeria (n = 99); GWD, Gambian in Western Division, The Gambia (n = 113); LWK, Luhya in Webuye, Kenya (n = 99); MSL, Mende in Sierra Leone (n = 85); and YRI, Yoruba in Ibadan, Nigeria (n = 108).
FIGURE 3PCA results on the individual level among 2813 individuals from the CTQ and CTT groups, and other five different geographic region populations. (A) PCA results based on PC1 and PC2. (B) PCA results based on PC1 and PC3. (C) PCA results based on PC2 and PC3.
FIGURE 4(A) Inferred population genetic structure by STRUCTURE analysis under a model with three ancestral components (K = 3). (B) Ancestral composition proportions of these 28 populations at K = 3; (C) triangle plots for individual ancestry estimations among the CTQ and CTT groups, and other five different geographic region populations. Dots with diverse colors represent individuals from different continental regions. EAS, East Asian; SAS, South Asian; AMR, American; EUR, European; AFR, African.
FIGURE 5Box plots of pairwise I n and locus-by-locus of F ST values. (A) Pairwise I n values for the 59 au-DIPs among the five different geographical region populations. (B) Pairwise F ST values for the 59 au-DIPs among the five different geographical region populations.