Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16955328›Full record

ArticleGenetica2007

A statistical model for dissecting genomic imprinting through genetic mapping.

Yuehua Cui, James M Cheverud, Rongling Wu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Genetica, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Yuehua CuiDepartment of Statistics and Probability, Michigan State University, A-411 Wells Hall, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. cui@stt.msu.edu
James M Cheverud
Rongling Wu
Michigan State University · USUniversity of Florida · USWashington University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As a result of nonequivalent genetic contribution of maternal and paternal genomes to offsprings, genomic imprinting or called parent-of-origin effect, has been broadly identified in plants, animals and humans. Its role in shaping organism's development has been unanimously recognized. However, statistical methods for identifying imprinted quantitative trait loci (iQTL) and estimating the imprinted effect have not been well developed. In this article, we propose an efficient statistical procedure for genomewide estimating and testing the effects of significant iQTL underlying the quantitative variation of interested traits. The developed model can be applied to two different genetic cross designs, backcross and F(2) families derived from inbred lines. The proposed procedure is built within the maximum likelihood framework and implemented with the EM algorithm. Extensive simulation studies show that the proposed model is well performed in a variety of situations. To demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed approach, we apply the model to a published data in an F(2) family derived from LG/S and SM/S mouse stains. Two partially maternal imprinting iQTL are identified which regulate the growth of body weight. Our approach provides a testable framework for identifying and estimating iQTL involved in the genetic control of complex traits.

Indexed as

Genetic TechniquesGenomic ImprintingAlgorithmsAnimalsBody WeightChromosome MappingCrosses, GeneticGenomeHumansLikelihood FunctionsMiceModels, GeneticModels, StatisticalQuantitative Trait LociResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID16955328
OpenAlexW2072728321

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.