ASSOCIATON TESTS THAT ACCOMMODATE GENOTYPING ERRORS

High-throughput SNP arrays provide estimates of genotypes for up to one million loci, often used in genome-wide association studies. While these estimates are typically very accurate, genotyping errors do occur, which can influence in particular the most extreme test statistics and p-values. Estimates for the genotype uncertainties are also available, although typically ignored. In this manuscript, we develop a framework to incorporate these genotype uncertainties in case-control studies for any genetic model. We verify that using the assumption of a “local alternative” in the score test is very reasonable for effect sizes typically seen in SNP association studies, and show that the power of the score test is simply a function of the correlation of the genotype probabilities with the true genotypes. We demonstrate that the power to detect a true association can be substantially increased for difficult to call genotypes, resulting in improved inference in association studies.

The impact of genotyping error on haplotype reconstruction and frequency estimation

The choice of genotyping families vs unrelated individuals is a critical factor in any large-scale linkage disequilibrium (LD) study. The use of unrelated individuals for such studies is promising, but in contrast to family designs, unrelated samples do not facilitate detection of genotyping errors, which have been shown to be of great importance for LD and linkage studies and may be even more important in genotyping collaborations across laboratories. Here we employ some of the most commonly-used analysis methods to examine the relative accuracy of haplotype estimation using families vs unrelateds in the presence of genotyping error. The results suggest that even slight amounts of genotyping error can significantly decrease haplotype frequency and reconstruction accuracy, that the ability to detect such errors in large families is essential when the number/complexity of haplotypes is high (low LD/common alleles). In contrast, in situations of low haplotype complexity (high LD and/or many rare alleles) unrelated individuals offer such a high degree of accuracy that there is little reason for less efficient family designs. Moreover, parent-child trios, which comprise the most popular family design and the most efficient in terms of the number of founder chromosomes per genotype but which contain little information for error detection, offer little or no gain over unrelated samples in nearly all cases, and thus do not seem a useful sampling compromise between unrelated individuals and large families. The implications of these results are discussed in the context of large-scale LD mapping projects such as the proposed genome-wide haplotype map.

Description of microsatellite markers and genotyping performances using feathers and buccal swabs for the Ivory gull (Pagophila eburnea).

We report 22 new polymorphic microsatellites for the Ivory gull (Pagophila eburnea), and we describe how they can be efficiently co-amplified using multiplexed polymerase chain reactions. In addition, we report DNA concentration, amplification success, rates of genotyping errors and the number of genotyping repetitions required to obtain reliable data with three types of noninvasive or nondestructive samples: shed feathers collected in colonies, feathers plucked from living individuals and buccal swabs. In two populations from Greenland (n=21) and Russia (Severnaya Zemlya Archipelago, n=21), the number of alleles per locus varied between 2 and 17, and expected heterozygosity per population ranged from 0.18 to 0.92. Twenty of the markers conformed to Hardy-Weinberg and linkage equilibrium expectations. Most markers were easily amplified and highly reliable when analysed from buccal swabs and plucked feathers, showing that buccal swabbing is a very efficient approach allowing good quality DNA retrieval. Although DNA amplification success using single shed feathers was generally high, the genotypes obtained from this type of samples were prone to error and thus need to be amplified several times. The set of microsatellite markers described here together with multiplex amplification conditions and genotyping error rates will be useful for population genetic studies of the Ivory gull.

Buccal swabs allow efficient and reliable microsatellite genotyping in amphibians

Buccal swabs have recently been used as a minimally invasive sampling method in genetic studies of wild populations, including amphibian species. Yet it is not known to date what is the level of reliability for microsatellite genotypes obtained using such samples. Allelic dropout and false alleles may affect the genotyping derived from buccal samples. Here we quantified the success of microsatellite amplification and the rates of genotyping errors using buccal swabs in two amphibian species, the Alpine newt Triturus alpestris and the Green tree frog Hyla arborea, and we estimated two important parameters for downstream analyses, namely the number of repetitions required to achieve typing reliability and the probability of identity among genotypes. Amplification success was high, and only one locus tested required two to three repetitions to achieve reliable genotypes, showing that buccal swabbing is a very efficient approach allowing good quality DNA retrieval. This sampling method which allows avoiding the controversial toe-clipping will likely prove very useful in the context of amphibian conservation.

DNA degradation in avian faecal samples and feasibility of non-invasive genetic studies applied to threatened capercaillie populations

We evaluated the feasibility of using faeces as a non-invasively collected DNA source for the genetic study of an endangered bird population (capercaillie; Tetrao urogallus). We used a multitube approach, and for our panel of 11 microsatellites genotyping reliability was estimated at 98% with five repetitions. Experiments showed that free DNases in faecal material were the major cause of DNA degradation. Our results demonstrate that using avian faeces as a source of DNA, reliable microsatellite genotyping can be obtained with a reasonable number of PCR replicates.

Imputation of microsatellite alleles from dense SNP genotypes for parentage verification across multiple Bos taurus and Bos indicus breeds

To assist cattle producers transition from microsatellite (MS) to single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping for parental verification we previously devised an effective and inexpensive method to impute MS alleles from SNP haplotypes. While the reported method was verified with only a limited data set (N = 479) from Brown Swiss, Guernsey, Holstein, and Jersey cattle, some of the MS-SNP haplotype associations were concordant across these phylogenetically diverse breeds. This implied that some haplotypes predate modern breed formation and remain in strong linkage disequilibrium. To expand the utility of MS allele imputation across breeds, MS and SNP data from more than 8000 animals representing 39 breeds (Bos taurus and B. indicus) were used to predict 9410 SNP haplotypes, incorporating an average of 73 SNPs per haplotype, for which alleles from 12 MS markers could be accurately be imputed. Approximately 25% of the MS-SNP haplotypes were present in multiple breeds (N = 2 to 36 breeds). These shared haplotypes allowed for MS imputation in breeds that were not represented in the reference population with only a small increase in Mendelian inheritance inconsistancies. Our reported reference haplotypes can be used for any cattle breed and the reported methods can be applied to any species to aid the transition from MS to SNP genetic markers. While ~91% of the animals with imputed alleles for 12 MS markers had ≤1 Mendelian inheritance conflicts with their parents' reported MS genotypes, this figure was 96% for our reference animals, indicating potential errors in the reported MS genotypes. The workflow we suggest autocorrects for genotyping errors and rare haplotypes, by MS genotyping animals whose imputed MS alleles fail parentage verification, and then incorporating those animals into the reference dataset.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA)--an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence, the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association (STREGA) studies initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed, but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association Studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modelling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information into the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the STrengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and issues of data volume that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Strengthening the reporting of genetic association studies (STREGA): an extension of the STROBE Statement

Making sense of rapidly evolving evidence on genetic associations is crucial to making genuine advances in human genomics and the eventual integration of this information in the practice of medicine and public health. Assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of this evidence, and hence the ability to synthesize it, has been limited by inadequate reporting of results. The STrengthening the REporting of Genetic Association studies (STREGA) initiative builds on the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement and provides additions to 12 of the 22 items on the STROBE checklist. The additions concern population stratification, genotyping errors, modeling haplotype variation, Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, replication, selection of participants, rationale for choice of genes and variants, treatment effects in studying quantitative traits, statistical methods, relatedness, reporting of descriptive and outcome data, and the volume of data issues that are important to consider in genetic association studies. The STREGA recommendations do not prescribe or dictate how a genetic association study should be designed but seek to enhance the transparency of its reporting, regardless of choices made during design, conduct, or analysis.

Theoretical and experimental studies of linkage disequilibrium in human populations

Linkage disequilibrium (LD) is defined as the nonrandom association of alleles at two or more loci in a population and may be a useful tool in a diverse array of applications including disease gene mapping, elucidating the demographic history of populations, and testing hypotheses of human evolution. However, the successful application of LD-based approaches to pertinent genetic questions is hampered by a lack of understanding about the forces that mediate the genome-wide distribution of LD within and between human populations. Delineating the genomic patterns of LD is a complex task that will require interdisciplinary research that transcends traditional scientific boundaries. The research presented in this dissertation is predicated upon the need for interdisciplinary studies and both theoretical and experimental projects were pursued. In the theoretical studies, I have investigated the effect of genotyping errors and SNP identification strategies on estimates of LD. The primary importance of these two chapters is that they provide important insights and guidance for the design of future empirical LD studies. Furthermore, I analyzed the allele frequency distribution of 26,530 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in three populations and generated the first-generation natural selection map of the human genome, which will be an important resource for explaining and understanding genomic patterns of LD. Finally, in the experimental study, I describe a novel and simple, low-cost, and high-throughput SNP genotyping method. The theoretical analyses and experimental tools developed in this dissertation will facilitate a more complete understanding of patterns of LD in human populations. ^

A genome scan for eye color in 502 twin families: Most variation is due to a QTL on chromosome 15q

We have rated eye color on a 3-point scale (1=blue/grey, 2=hazel/green, 3=brown) in 502 twin families and carried out a 5-10 cM genome scan (400-757 markers). We analyzed eye color as a threshold trait and performed multipoint sib pair linkage analysis using variance components analysis in Mx. A lod of 19.2 was found at the marker D15S1002, less than 1 cM from OCA2, which has been previously implicated in eye color variation. We estimate that 74% of variance in eye color liability is due to this QTL and a further 18% due to polygenic effects. However, a large shoulder on this peak suggests that other loci affecting eye color may be telomeric of OCA2 and inflating the QTL estimate. No other peaks reached genome-wide significance, although lods >2 were seen on 5p and 14q and lods >1 were additionally seen on chromosomes 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17 and 18. Most of these secondary peaks were reduced or eliminated when we repeated the scan as a two locus analysis with the 15q linkage included, although this does not necessarily exclude them as false positives. We also estimated the interaction between the 15q QTL and the other marker locus but there was only minor evidence for additive x additive epistasis. Elaborating the analysis to the full two-locus model including non-additive main effects and interactions did not strengthen the evidence for epistasis. We conclude that most variation in eye color in Europeans is due to polymorphism in OCA2 but that there may be modifiers at several other loci.