Cargando…

Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population

BACKGROUND: Despite many success stories of genome wide association studies (GWAS), challenges exist in QTL detection especially in datasets with many levels of relatedness. In this study we compared four methods of GWA on a dataset simulated for the 15(th )QTL-MAS workshop. The four methods were 1)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dashab, Golam R, Kadri, Naveen K, Shariati, Mohammad M, Sahana, Goutam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3363158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22640641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-6-S2-S4
_version_ 1782234305743814656
author Dashab, Golam R
Kadri, Naveen K
Shariati, Mohammad M
Sahana, Goutam
author_facet Dashab, Golam R
Kadri, Naveen K
Shariati, Mohammad M
Sahana, Goutam
author_sort Dashab, Golam R
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Despite many success stories of genome wide association studies (GWAS), challenges exist in QTL detection especially in datasets with many levels of relatedness. In this study we compared four methods of GWA on a dataset simulated for the 15(th )QTL-MAS workshop. The four methods were 1) Mixed model analysis (MMA), 2) Random haplotype model (RHM), 3) Genealogy-based mixed model (GENMIX), and 4) Bayesian variable selection (BVS). The data consisted of phenotypes of 2000 animals from 20 sire families and were genotyped with 9990 SNPs on five chromosomes. RESULTS: Out of the eight simulated QTL, these four methods MMA, RHM, GENMIX and BVS identified 6, 6, 8 and 7 QTL respectively and 4 QTL were common across the methods. GENMIX had the highest power to detect QTL however it also produced 4 false positives. BVS was the second best method in terms of power, detecting all QTL except the one on chromosome 5 with epistatic interaction. Two spurious associations were obtained across methods. Though all the methods considered the full pedigree in the analyses, it was not sufficient to avoid all the spurious associations arising due to family structure. CONCLUSIONS: Using several methods with divergent approaches for GWAS can be useful in gaining confidence on the QTL identified. In our comparison, GENMIX was found to be the best method in terms of power but it needs appropriate correction for multiple testing to avoid the false positives. This study shows that the issues of multiple testing and the relatedness among study samples need special attention in GWAS.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3363158
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-33631582012-06-01 Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population Dashab, Golam R Kadri, Naveen K Shariati, Mohammad M Sahana, Goutam BMC Proc Proceedings BACKGROUND: Despite many success stories of genome wide association studies (GWAS), challenges exist in QTL detection especially in datasets with many levels of relatedness. In this study we compared four methods of GWA on a dataset simulated for the 15(th )QTL-MAS workshop. The four methods were 1) Mixed model analysis (MMA), 2) Random haplotype model (RHM), 3) Genealogy-based mixed model (GENMIX), and 4) Bayesian variable selection (BVS). The data consisted of phenotypes of 2000 animals from 20 sire families and were genotyped with 9990 SNPs on five chromosomes. RESULTS: Out of the eight simulated QTL, these four methods MMA, RHM, GENMIX and BVS identified 6, 6, 8 and 7 QTL respectively and 4 QTL were common across the methods. GENMIX had the highest power to detect QTL however it also produced 4 false positives. BVS was the second best method in terms of power, detecting all QTL except the one on chromosome 5 with epistatic interaction. Two spurious associations were obtained across methods. Though all the methods considered the full pedigree in the analyses, it was not sufficient to avoid all the spurious associations arising due to family structure. CONCLUSIONS: Using several methods with divergent approaches for GWAS can be useful in gaining confidence on the QTL identified. In our comparison, GENMIX was found to be the best method in terms of power but it needs appropriate correction for multiple testing to avoid the false positives. This study shows that the issues of multiple testing and the relatedness among study samples need special attention in GWAS. BioMed Central 2012-05-21 /pmc/articles/PMC3363158/ /pubmed/22640641 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-6-S2-S4 Text en Copyright ©2012 Dashab 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
Dashab, Golam R
Kadri, Naveen K
Shariati, Mohammad M
Sahana, Goutam
Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population
title Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population
title_full Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population
title_fullStr Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population
title_short Comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a Bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population
title_sort comparison of linear mixed model analysis and genealogy-based haplotype clustering with a bayesian approach for association mapping in a pedigreed population
topic Proceedings
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3363158/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22640641
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1753-6561-6-S2-S4
work_keys_str_mv AT dashabgolamr comparisonoflinearmixedmodelanalysisandgenealogybasedhaplotypeclusteringwithabayesianapproachforassociationmappinginapedigreedpopulation
AT kadrinaveenk comparisonoflinearmixedmodelanalysisandgenealogybasedhaplotypeclusteringwithabayesianapproachforassociationmappinginapedigreedpopulation
AT shariatimohammadm comparisonoflinearmixedmodelanalysisandgenealogybasedhaplotypeclusteringwithabayesianapproachforassociationmappinginapedigreedpopulation
AT sahanagoutam comparisonoflinearmixedmodelanalysisandgenealogybasedhaplotypeclusteringwithabayesianapproachforassociationmappinginapedigreedpopulation