ArticleBMC genetics2011
Evaluation of approaches for identifying population informative markers from high density SNP chips.
Article in BMC genetics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
45 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Application of Exon Primed Intron Crossing Markers to Cross-AmplifyEcology and evolution · 2026Article
- Efficient amplicon panels for evaluating hybridization and genetic structure in the Schistosoma haematobium species group.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based discovery of informative SNPs for population assignment through whole genome sequencing.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- A Pipeline and Recommendations for Population and Individual Diagnostic SNP Selection in Non-Model Species.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Identifying low-density, ancestry-informative SNP markers through whole genome resequencing in Indian, Chinese, and wild yak.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- The use of SNP markers for cattle breed identification.Journal of applied genetics · 2024Article
- Panmixia in the American eel extends to its tropical range of distribution: Biological implications and policymaking challenges.Evolutionary applications · 2023Article
- A Novel Insight into the Identification of Potential SNP Markers for the Genomic Characterization of Buffalo Breeds in Pakistan.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- Detecting SNP markers discriminating horse breeds by deep learning.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Breed identification using breed-informative SNPs and machine learning based on whole genome sequence data and SNP chip data.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2023Article
- A web tool for the global identification of pig breeds.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2023Article
- The use of a genomic relationship matrix for breed assignment of cattle breeds: comparison and combination with a machine learning method.Journal of animal science · 2023Article
- Evaluating the use of statistical and machine learning methods for estimating breed composition of purebred and crossbred animals in thirteen cattle breeds using genomic information.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Genetic diversity and breed-informative SNPs identification in domestic pig populations using coding SNPs.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- Single nucleotide polymorphism marker combinations for classifying Yeonsan Ogye chicken using a machine learning approach.Journal of animal science and technology · 2022Article
- Article
- A 20-SNP Panel as a Tool for Genetic Authentication and Traceability of Pig Breeds.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenetic markers can be used to identify and verify the origin of individuals. Motivation for the inference of ancestry ranges from conservation genetics to forensic analysis. High density assays featuring Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) markers can be exploited to create a reduced panel containing the most informative markers for these purposes. The objectives of this study were to evaluate methods of marker selection and determine the minimum number of markers from the BovineSNP50 BeadChip required to verify the origin of individuals in European cattle breeds. Delta, Wright's FST, Weir & Cockerham's FST and PCA methods for population differentiation were compared. The level of informativeness of each SNP was estimated from the breed specific allele frequencies. Individual assignment analysis was performed using the ranked informative markers. Stringency levels were applied by log-likelihood ratio to assess the confidence of the assignment test.
resultsA 95% assignment success rate for the 384 individually genotyped animals was achieved with <80, <100, <140 and <200 SNP markers (with increasing stringency threshold levels) across all the examined methods for marker selection. No further gain in power of assignment was achieved by sampling in excess of 200 SNP markers. The marker selection method that required the lowest number of SNP markers to verify the animal's breed origin was Wright's FST (60 to 140 SNPs depending on the chosen degree of confidence). Certain breeds required fewer markers (<100) to achieve 100% assignment success. In contrast, closely related breeds require more markers (~200) to achieve>95% assignment success. The power of assignment success, and therefore the number of SNP markers required, is dependent on the levels of genetic heterogeneity and pool of samples considered.
conclusionsWhile all SNP selection methods produced marker panels capable of breed identification, the power of assignment varied markedly among analysis methods. Thus, with effective exploration of available high density genetic markers, a diagnostic panel of highly informative markers can be produced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.