Cargando…
Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data
The central issue for Genetic Analysis Workshop 14 (GAW14) is the question, which is the better strategy for linkage analysis, the use of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or microsatellite markers? To answer this question we analyzed the simulated data using Duffy's SIB-PAIR program, whic...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1866774/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16451621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2156-6-S1-S16 |
_version_ | 1782133324730335232 |
---|---|
author | Yue, Qingqi Apprey, Victor Bonney, George E |
author_facet | Yue, Qingqi Apprey, Victor Bonney, George E |
author_sort | Yue, Qingqi |
collection | PubMed |
description | The central issue for Genetic Analysis Workshop 14 (GAW14) is the question, which is the better strategy for linkage analysis, the use of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or microsatellite markers? To answer this question we analyzed the simulated data using Duffy's SIB-PAIR program, which can incorporate parental genotypes, and our identity-by-state – identity-by-descent (IBS-IBD) transformation method of affected sib-pair linkage analysis which uses the matrix transformation between IBS and IBD. The advantages of our method are as follows: the assumption of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is not necessary; the parental genotype information maybe all unknown; both IBS and its related IBD transformation can be used in the linkage analysis; the determinant of the IBS-IBD transformation matrix provides a quantitative measure of the quality of the marker in linkage analysis. With the originally distributed simulated data, we found that 1) for microsatellite markers there are virtually no differences in types I and II error rates when parental genotypes were or were not used; 2) on average, a microsatellite marker has more power than a SNP marker does in linkage detection; 3) if parental genotype information is used, SNP markers show lower type I error rates than microsatellite markers; and 4) if parental genotypes are not available, SNP markers show considerable variation in type I error rates for different methods. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1866774 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2005 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-18667742007-05-11 Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data Yue, Qingqi Apprey, Victor Bonney, George E BMC Genet Proceedings The central issue for Genetic Analysis Workshop 14 (GAW14) is the question, which is the better strategy for linkage analysis, the use of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) or microsatellite markers? To answer this question we analyzed the simulated data using Duffy's SIB-PAIR program, which can incorporate parental genotypes, and our identity-by-state – identity-by-descent (IBS-IBD) transformation method of affected sib-pair linkage analysis which uses the matrix transformation between IBS and IBD. The advantages of our method are as follows: the assumption of Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium is not necessary; the parental genotype information maybe all unknown; both IBS and its related IBD transformation can be used in the linkage analysis; the determinant of the IBS-IBD transformation matrix provides a quantitative measure of the quality of the marker in linkage analysis. With the originally distributed simulated data, we found that 1) for microsatellite markers there are virtually no differences in types I and II error rates when parental genotypes were or were not used; 2) on average, a microsatellite marker has more power than a SNP marker does in linkage detection; 3) if parental genotype information is used, SNP markers show lower type I error rates than microsatellite markers; and 4) if parental genotypes are not available, SNP markers show considerable variation in type I error rates for different methods. BioMed Central 2005-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC1866774/ /pubmed/16451621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2156-6-S1-S16 Text en Copyright © 2005 Yue et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Proceedings Yue, Qingqi Apprey, Victor Bonney, George E Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data |
title | Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data |
title_full | Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data |
title_fullStr | Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data |
title_full_unstemmed | Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data |
title_short | Which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? Evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on GAW14 data |
title_sort | which strategy is better for linkage analysis: single-nucleotide polymorphisms or microsatellites? evaluation by identity-by-state – identity-by-descent transformation affected sib-pair method on gaw14 data |
topic | Proceedings |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1866774/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16451621 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2156-6-S1-S16 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT yueqingqi whichstrategyisbetterforlinkageanalysissinglenucleotidepolymorphismsormicrosatellitesevaluationbyidentitybystateidentitybydescenttransformationaffectedsibpairmethodongaw14data AT appreyvictor whichstrategyisbetterforlinkageanalysissinglenucleotidepolymorphismsormicrosatellitesevaluationbyidentitybystateidentitybydescenttransformationaffectedsibpairmethodongaw14data AT bonneygeorgee whichstrategyisbetterforlinkageanalysissinglenucleotidepolymorphismsormicrosatellitesevaluationbyidentitybystateidentitybydescenttransformationaffectedsibpairmethodongaw14data |