Cargando…
A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects
We used Genetic Analysis Workshop 16 Problem 3 Framingham Heart Study simulated data set to compare methods for association analysis of quantitative traits in related individuals. More specifically, we investigated type I error and relative power of three approaches: the measured genotype, the quant...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2009
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2795895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20017988 |
_version_ | 1782175464561836032 |
---|---|
author | Saint Pierre, Aude Vitezica, Zulma Martinez, Maria |
author_facet | Saint Pierre, Aude Vitezica, Zulma Martinez, Maria |
author_sort | Saint Pierre, Aude |
collection | PubMed |
description | We used Genetic Analysis Workshop 16 Problem 3 Framingham Heart Study simulated data set to compare methods for association analysis of quantitative traits in related individuals. More specifically, we investigated type I error and relative power of three approaches: the measured genotype, the quantitative transmission-disequilibrium test (QTDT), and the quantitative trait linkage-disequilibrium (QTLD) tests. We studied high-density lipoprotein and triglyceride (TG) lipid variables, as measured at Visit 1. Knowing the answers, we selected three true major genes for high-density lipoprotein and/or TG. Empirical distributions of the three association models were derived from the first 100 replicates. In these data, all three models were similar in error rates. Across the three association models, the power was the lowest for the functional SNP with smallest size effects (i.e., α2), and for the less heritable trait (i.e., TG). Our results showed that measured genotype outperformed the two orthogonal-based association models (QTLD, QTDT), even after accounting for population stratification. QTDT had the lowest power rates. This is consistent with the amount of marker and trait data used by each association model. While the effective sample sizes varied little across our tested variants, we observed some large power drops and marked differences in performances of the models. We found that the performances contrasted the most for the tightly linked, but not associated, functional variants. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2795895 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2009 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-27958952009-12-18 A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects Saint Pierre, Aude Vitezica, Zulma Martinez, Maria BMC Proc Proceedings We used Genetic Analysis Workshop 16 Problem 3 Framingham Heart Study simulated data set to compare methods for association analysis of quantitative traits in related individuals. More specifically, we investigated type I error and relative power of three approaches: the measured genotype, the quantitative transmission-disequilibrium test (QTDT), and the quantitative trait linkage-disequilibrium (QTLD) tests. We studied high-density lipoprotein and triglyceride (TG) lipid variables, as measured at Visit 1. Knowing the answers, we selected three true major genes for high-density lipoprotein and/or TG. Empirical distributions of the three association models were derived from the first 100 replicates. In these data, all three models were similar in error rates. Across the three association models, the power was the lowest for the functional SNP with smallest size effects (i.e., α2), and for the less heritable trait (i.e., TG). Our results showed that measured genotype outperformed the two orthogonal-based association models (QTLD, QTDT), even after accounting for population stratification. QTDT had the lowest power rates. This is consistent with the amount of marker and trait data used by each association model. While the effective sample sizes varied little across our tested variants, we observed some large power drops and marked differences in performances of the models. We found that the performances contrasted the most for the tightly linked, but not associated, functional variants. BioMed Central 2009-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC2795895/ /pubmed/20017988 Text en Copyright ©2009 Pierre 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 Saint Pierre, Aude Vitezica, Zulma Martinez, Maria A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects |
title | A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects |
title_full | A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects |
title_fullStr | A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects |
title_short | A comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects |
title_sort | comparative study of three methods for detecting association of quantitative traits in samples of related subjects |
topic | Proceedings |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2795895/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20017988 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT saintpierreaude acomparativestudyofthreemethodsfordetectingassociationofquantitativetraitsinsamplesofrelatedsubjects AT vitezicazulma acomparativestudyofthreemethodsfordetectingassociationofquantitativetraitsinsamplesofrelatedsubjects AT martinezmaria acomparativestudyofthreemethodsfordetectingassociationofquantitativetraitsinsamplesofrelatedsubjects AT saintpierreaude comparativestudyofthreemethodsfordetectingassociationofquantitativetraitsinsamplesofrelatedsubjects AT vitezicazulma comparativestudyofthreemethodsfordetectingassociationofquantitativetraitsinsamplesofrelatedsubjects AT martinezmaria comparativestudyofthreemethodsfordetectingassociationofquantitativetraitsinsamplesofrelatedsubjects |