Cargando…
Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering
Gene–gene interactions may contribute to the genetic variation underlying complex traits but have not always been taken fully into account. Statistical analyses that consider gene–gene interaction may increase the power of detecting associations, especially for low-marginal-effect markers, and may e...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4012196/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24817878 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2014.00106 |
_version_ | 1782314902112698368 |
---|---|
author | Sun, Xiangqing Lu, Qing Mukherjee, Shubhabrata Crane, Paul K. Elston, Robert Ritchie, Marylyn D. |
author_facet | Sun, Xiangqing Lu, Qing Mukherjee, Shubhabrata Crane, Paul K. Elston, Robert Ritchie, Marylyn D. |
author_sort | Sun, Xiangqing |
collection | PubMed |
description | Gene–gene interactions may contribute to the genetic variation underlying complex traits but have not always been taken fully into account. Statistical analyses that consider gene–gene interaction may increase the power of detecting associations, especially for low-marginal-effect markers, and may explain in part the “missing heritability.” Detecting pair-wise and higher-order interactions genome-wide requires enormous computational power. Filtering pipelines increase the computational speed by limiting the number of tests performed. We summarize existing filtering approaches to detect epistasis, after distinguishing the purposes that lead us to search for epistasis. Statistical filtering includes quality control on the basis of single marker statistics to avoid the analysis of bad and least informative data, and limits the search space for finding interactions. Biological filtering includes targeting specific pathways, integrating various databases based on known biological and metabolic pathways, gene function ontology and protein–protein interactions. It is increasingly possible to target single-nucleotide polymorphisms that have defined functions on gene expression, though not belonging to protein-coding genes. Filtering can improve the power of an interaction association study, but also increases the chance of missing important findings. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4012196 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-40121962014-05-09 Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering Sun, Xiangqing Lu, Qing Mukherjee, Shubhabrata Crane, Paul K. Elston, Robert Ritchie, Marylyn D. Front Genet Genetics Gene–gene interactions may contribute to the genetic variation underlying complex traits but have not always been taken fully into account. Statistical analyses that consider gene–gene interaction may increase the power of detecting associations, especially for low-marginal-effect markers, and may explain in part the “missing heritability.” Detecting pair-wise and higher-order interactions genome-wide requires enormous computational power. Filtering pipelines increase the computational speed by limiting the number of tests performed. We summarize existing filtering approaches to detect epistasis, after distinguishing the purposes that lead us to search for epistasis. Statistical filtering includes quality control on the basis of single marker statistics to avoid the analysis of bad and least informative data, and limits the search space for finding interactions. Biological filtering includes targeting specific pathways, integrating various databases based on known biological and metabolic pathways, gene function ontology and protein–protein interactions. It is increasingly possible to target single-nucleotide polymorphisms that have defined functions on gene expression, though not belonging to protein-coding genes. Filtering can improve the power of an interaction association study, but also increases the chance of missing important findings. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-04-30 /pmc/articles/PMC4012196/ /pubmed/24817878 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2014.00106 Text en Copyright © 2014 Sun, Lu, Mukherjee, Crane, Elston and Ritchie. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Genetics Sun, Xiangqing Lu, Qing Mukherjee, Shubhabrata Crane, Paul K. Elston, Robert Ritchie, Marylyn D. Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering |
title | Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering |
title_full | Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering |
title_fullStr | Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering |
title_full_unstemmed | Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering |
title_short | Analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering |
title_sort | analysis pipeline for the epistasis search – statistical versus biological filtering |
topic | Genetics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4012196/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24817878 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2014.00106 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sunxiangqing analysispipelinefortheepistasissearchstatisticalversusbiologicalfiltering AT luqing analysispipelinefortheepistasissearchstatisticalversusbiologicalfiltering AT mukherjeeshubhabrata analysispipelinefortheepistasissearchstatisticalversusbiologicalfiltering AT cranepaulk analysispipelinefortheepistasissearchstatisticalversusbiologicalfiltering AT elstonrobert analysispipelinefortheepistasissearchstatisticalversusbiologicalfiltering AT ritchiemarylynd analysispipelinefortheepistasissearchstatisticalversusbiologicalfiltering |