Cargando…

Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs

The aim of this study was to compare the variance component approach for QTL linkage mapping in half-sib designs to the simple regression method. Empirical power was determined by Monte Carlo simulation in granddaughter designs. The factors studied (base values in parentheses) included the number of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kolbehdari, Davood, Jansen, Gerald B, Schaeffer, Lawrence R, Allen, Brian O
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2005
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2697240/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16277970
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-37-7-601
_version_ 1782168312556290048
author Kolbehdari, Davood
Jansen, Gerald B
Schaeffer, Lawrence R
Allen, Brian O
author_facet Kolbehdari, Davood
Jansen, Gerald B
Schaeffer, Lawrence R
Allen, Brian O
author_sort Kolbehdari, Davood
collection PubMed
description The aim of this study was to compare the variance component approach for QTL linkage mapping in half-sib designs to the simple regression method. Empirical power was determined by Monte Carlo simulation in granddaughter designs. The factors studied (base values in parentheses) included the number of sires (5) and sons per sire (80), ratio of QTL variance to total genetic variance (λ = 0.1), marker spacing (10 cM), and QTL allele frequency (0.5). A single bi-allelic QTL and six equally spaced markers with six alleles each were simulated. Empirical power using the regression method was 0.80, 0.92 and 0.98 for 5, 10, and 20 sires, respectively, versus 0.88, 0.98 and 0.99 using the variance component method. Power was 0.74, 0.80, 0.93, and 0.95 using regression versus 0.77, 0.88, 0.94, and 0.97 using the variance component method for QTL variance ratios (λ) of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3, respectively. Power was 0.79, 0.85, 0.80 and 0.87 using regression versus 0.80, 0.86, 0.88, and 0.85 using the variance component method for QTL allele frequencies of 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, and 0.8, respectively. The log(10 )of type I error profiles were quite flat at close marker spacing (1 cM), confirming the inability to fine-map QTL by linkage analysis in half-sib designs. The variance component method showed slightly more potential than the regression method in QTL mapping.
format Text
id pubmed-2697240
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2005
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26972402009-06-16 Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs Kolbehdari, Davood Jansen, Gerald B Schaeffer, Lawrence R Allen, Brian O Genet Sel Evol Research The aim of this study was to compare the variance component approach for QTL linkage mapping in half-sib designs to the simple regression method. Empirical power was determined by Monte Carlo simulation in granddaughter designs. The factors studied (base values in parentheses) included the number of sires (5) and sons per sire (80), ratio of QTL variance to total genetic variance (λ = 0.1), marker spacing (10 cM), and QTL allele frequency (0.5). A single bi-allelic QTL and six equally spaced markers with six alleles each were simulated. Empirical power using the regression method was 0.80, 0.92 and 0.98 for 5, 10, and 20 sires, respectively, versus 0.88, 0.98 and 0.99 using the variance component method. Power was 0.74, 0.80, 0.93, and 0.95 using regression versus 0.77, 0.88, 0.94, and 0.97 using the variance component method for QTL variance ratios (λ) of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, and 0.3, respectively. Power was 0.79, 0.85, 0.80 and 0.87 using regression versus 0.80, 0.86, 0.88, and 0.85 using the variance component method for QTL allele frequencies of 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, and 0.8, respectively. The log(10 )of type I error profiles were quite flat at close marker spacing (1 cM), confirming the inability to fine-map QTL by linkage analysis in half-sib designs. The variance component method showed slightly more potential than the regression method in QTL mapping. BioMed Central 2005-11-15 /pmc/articles/PMC2697240/ /pubmed/16277970 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-37-7-601 Text en Copyright © 2005 INRA, EDP Sciences
spellingShingle Research
Kolbehdari, Davood
Jansen, Gerald B
Schaeffer, Lawrence R
Allen, Brian O
Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs
title Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs
title_full Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs
title_fullStr Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs
title_full_unstemmed Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs
title_short Power of QTL detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs
title_sort power of qtl detection by either fixed or random models in half-sib designs
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2697240/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16277970
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1297-9686-37-7-601
work_keys_str_mv AT kolbehdaridavood powerofqtldetectionbyeitherfixedorrandommodelsinhalfsibdesigns
AT jansengeraldb powerofqtldetectionbyeitherfixedorrandommodelsinhalfsibdesigns
AT schaefferlawrencer powerofqtldetectionbyeitherfixedorrandommodelsinhalfsibdesigns
AT allenbriano powerofqtldetectionbyeitherfixedorrandommodelsinhalfsibdesigns