Cargando…

Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips

BACKGROUND: Illumina's Infinium SNP BeadChips are extensively used in both small and large-scale genetic studies. A fundamental step in any analysis is the processing of raw allele A and allele B intensities from each SNP into genotype calls (AA, AB, BB). Various algorithms which make use of di...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ritchie, Matthew E, Liu, Ruijie, Carvalho, Benilton S, Irizarry, Rafael A
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3063825/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21385424
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-68
_version_ 1782200840698724352
author Ritchie, Matthew E
Liu, Ruijie
Carvalho, Benilton S
Irizarry, Rafael A
author_facet Ritchie, Matthew E
Liu, Ruijie
Carvalho, Benilton S
Irizarry, Rafael A
author_sort Ritchie, Matthew E
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Illumina's Infinium SNP BeadChips are extensively used in both small and large-scale genetic studies. A fundamental step in any analysis is the processing of raw allele A and allele B intensities from each SNP into genotype calls (AA, AB, BB). Various algorithms which make use of different statistical models are available for this task. We compare four methods (GenCall, Illuminus, GenoSNP and CRLMM) on data where the true genotypes are known in advance and data from a recently published genome-wide association study. RESULTS: In general, differences in accuracy are relatively small between the methods evaluated, although CRLMM and GenoSNP were found to consistently outperform GenCall. The performance of Illuminus is heavily dependent on sample size, with lower no call rates and improved accuracy as the number of samples available increases. For X chromosome SNPs, methods with sex-dependent models (Illuminus, CRLMM) perform better than methods which ignore gender information (GenCall, GenoSNP). We observe that CRLMM and GenoSNP are more accurate at calling SNPs with low minor allele frequency than GenCall or Illuminus. The sample quality metrics from each of the four methods were found to have a high level of agreement at flagging samples with unusual signal characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: CRLMM, GenoSNP and GenCall can be applied with confidence in studies of any size, as their performance was shown to be invariant to the number of samples available. Illuminus on the other hand requires a larger number of samples to achieve comparable levels of accuracy and its use in smaller studies (50 or fewer individuals) is not recommended.
format Text
id pubmed-3063825
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30638252011-03-25 Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips Ritchie, Matthew E Liu, Ruijie Carvalho, Benilton S Irizarry, Rafael A BMC Bioinformatics Methodology Article BACKGROUND: Illumina's Infinium SNP BeadChips are extensively used in both small and large-scale genetic studies. A fundamental step in any analysis is the processing of raw allele A and allele B intensities from each SNP into genotype calls (AA, AB, BB). Various algorithms which make use of different statistical models are available for this task. We compare four methods (GenCall, Illuminus, GenoSNP and CRLMM) on data where the true genotypes are known in advance and data from a recently published genome-wide association study. RESULTS: In general, differences in accuracy are relatively small between the methods evaluated, although CRLMM and GenoSNP were found to consistently outperform GenCall. The performance of Illuminus is heavily dependent on sample size, with lower no call rates and improved accuracy as the number of samples available increases. For X chromosome SNPs, methods with sex-dependent models (Illuminus, CRLMM) perform better than methods which ignore gender information (GenCall, GenoSNP). We observe that CRLMM and GenoSNP are more accurate at calling SNPs with low minor allele frequency than GenCall or Illuminus. The sample quality metrics from each of the four methods were found to have a high level of agreement at flagging samples with unusual signal characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: CRLMM, GenoSNP and GenCall can be applied with confidence in studies of any size, as their performance was shown to be invariant to the number of samples available. Illuminus on the other hand requires a larger number of samples to achieve comparable levels of accuracy and its use in smaller studies (50 or fewer individuals) is not recommended. BioMed Central 2011-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC3063825/ /pubmed/21385424 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-68 Text en Copyright ©2011 Ritchie 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 Methodology Article
Ritchie, Matthew E
Liu, Ruijie
Carvalho, Benilton S
Irizarry, Rafael A
Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips
title Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips
title_full Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips
title_fullStr Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips
title_full_unstemmed Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips
title_short Comparing genotyping algorithms for Illumina's Infinium whole-genome SNP BeadChips
title_sort comparing genotyping algorithms for illumina's infinium whole-genome snp beadchips
topic Methodology Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3063825/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21385424
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-12-68
work_keys_str_mv AT ritchiematthewe comparinggenotypingalgorithmsforilluminasinfiniumwholegenomesnpbeadchips
AT liuruijie comparinggenotypingalgorithmsforilluminasinfiniumwholegenomesnpbeadchips
AT carvalhobeniltons comparinggenotypingalgorithmsforilluminasinfiniumwholegenomesnpbeadchips
AT comparinggenotypingalgorithmsforilluminasinfiniumwholegenomesnpbeadchips
AT irizarryrafaela comparinggenotypingalgorithmsforilluminasinfiniumwholegenomesnpbeadchips