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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Yue, Qingqi, Apprey, Victor, Bonney, George E
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