It is extremely expensive to conduct large sample size array- or sequencing based genome scale association studies. For a quantitative trait, an extreme case-control study design may improve the power and reduce the cost of variant calling. We investigated the performance of extreme study design when various proportions of samples are selected from the tails of phenotype distribution. Using simulations, we show that when risk genotypes become rare in the population and effect size is relatively small, it is beneficial to carry out an extreme sampling study. In particular, the number of selected cases and controls can even be unbalanced such that power is further increased, compared with a balanced selection. Our application to two data sets: methadone dose data and yearling weight data, demonstrated that similar results for full data analysis can be obtained using extreme sampling with only a fraction of the data. Using power analysis with simulated data and an experimental data application, we conclude that when full data is unavailable due to restricted budget, it is rewarding to employ an extreme sampling design in the sense that there can be immense cost reductions and qualitatively similar power as in the full data analysis.
Empirical confidence intervals (CIs) for the estimated quantitative trait locus (QTL) location from selective and non-selective non-parametric bootstrap resampling methods were compared for a genome scan involving an Angus x Brahman reciprocal fullsib backcross population. Genetic maps, based on 357 microsatellite markers, were constructed for 29 chromosomes using CRI-MAP V2.4. Twelve growth, carcass composition and beef quality traits (n = 527-602) were analysed to detect QTLs utilizing (composite) interval mapping approaches. CIs were investigated for 28 likelihood ratio test statistic (LRT) profiles for the one QTL per chromosome model. The CIs from the non-selective bootstrap method were largest (87 7 cM average or 79-2% coverage of test chromosomes). The Selective II procedure produced the smallest CI size (42.3 cM average). However, CI sizes from the Selective II procedure were more variable than those produced by the two LOD drop method. CI ranges from the Selective II procedure were also asymmetrical (relative to the most likely QTL position) due to the bias caused by the tendency for the estimated QTL position to be at a marker position in the bootstrap samples and due to monotonicity and asymmetry of the LRT curve in the original sample.
Objective The objectives of this study were to compare identified informative regions through two genome-wide association study (GWAS) approaches and determine the accuracy and bias of the direct genomic value (DGV) for milk production traits in Korean Holstein cattle, using two genomic prediction approaches: single-step genomic best linear unbiased prediction (ss-GBLUP) and Bayesian Bayes-B. Methods Records on production traits such as adjusted 305-day milk (MY305), fat (FY305), and protein (PY305) yields were collected from 265,271 first parity cows. After quality control, 50,765 single-nucleotide polymorphic genotypes were available for analysis. In GWAS for ss-GBLUP (ssGWAS) and Bayes-B (BayesGWAS), the proportion of genetic variance for each 1-Mb genomic window was calculated and used to identify informative genomic regions. Accuracy of the DGV was estimated by a five-fold cross-validation with random clustering. As a measure of accuracy for DGV, we also assessed the correlation between DGV and deregressed-estimated breeding value (DEBV). The bias of DGV for each method was obtained by determining regression coefficients. Results A total of nine and five significant windows (1 Mb) were identified for MY305 using ssGWAS and BayesGWAS, respectively. Using ssGWAS and BayesGWAS, we also detected multiple significant regions for FY305 (12 and 7) and PY305 (14 and 2), respectively. Both single-step DGV and Bayes DGV also showed somewhat moderate accuracy ranges for MY305 (0.32 to 0.34), FY305 (0.37 to 0.39), and PY305 (0.35 to 0.36) traits, respectively. The mean biases of DGVs determined using the single-step and Bayesian methods were 1.50±0.21 and 1.18±0.26 for MY305, 1.75±0.33 and 1.14±0.20 for FY305, and 1.59±0.20 and 1.14±0.15 for PY305, respectively. Conclusion From the bias perspective, we believe that genomic selection based on the application of Bayesian approaches would be more suitable than application of ss-GBLUP in Korean Holstein populations.
A simulation study was conducted to evaluate a fine-mapping method exploiting population-wide linkage disequilibrium. Data were simulated according to the pedigree structure based on a large paternal half-sib family population with a total of 1,034 or 2,068 progeny. Twenty autosomes of 100 cM were generated with 5 cM or 1 cM marker intervals for all founder individuals in the pedigree, and marker alleles and a number of quantitative trait loci (QTL) explaining a total of 70% phenotypic variance were generated and randomly assigned across the whole chromosomes, assuming linkage equilibrium between the markers. The founder chromosomes were then descended through the pedigree to the current offspring generation, including recombinants that were generated by recombination between adjacent markers. Power to detect QTL was high for the QTL with at least moderate size, which was more pronounced with larger sample size and denser marker map. However, sample size contributed much more significantly to power to detect QTL than map density to the precise estimate of QTL position. No QTL was detected on the test chromosomes in which QTL was not assigned, which did not allow detection of false positive QTL. For the multiple QTL that were closely located, the estimates of the QTL positions were biased, except when the QTL were located on the right marker positions. Our fine mapping simulation results indicate that construction of dense maps and large sample size is needed to increase power to detect QTL and mapping precision for QTL position.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.