Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22670224›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2012

Two-phase analysis in consensus genetic mapping.

Y Ronin, D Mester, D Minkov, R Belotserkovski, B N Jackson, P S Schnable, S Aluru, A Korol

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Construction of a High-Density Genetic Map ofFrontiers in plant science · 2021
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The potential of probabilistic graphical models in linkage map construction.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2017
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Construction of a high-density, high-resolution genetic map and its integration with BAC-based physical map in channel catfish.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2015
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. A consensus map for Ug99 stem rust resistance loci in wheat.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2014
    Article
  17. A simple sequence repeat- and single-nucleotide polymorphism-based genetic linkage map of the brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2013
    Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Y Ronin
D Mester
D Minkov
R Belotserkovski
B N Jackson
P S Schnable
S Aluru
A Korol

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Numerous mapping projects conducted on different species have generated an abundance of mapping data. Consequently, many multilocus maps have been constructed using diverse mapping populations and marker sets for the same organism. The quality of maps varies broadly among populations, marker sets, and software used, necessitating efforts to integrate the mapping information and generate consensus maps. The problem of consensus genetic mapping (MCGM) is by far more challenging compared with genetic mapping based on a single dataset, which by itself is also cumbersome. The additional complications introduced by consensus analysis include inter-population differences in recombination rate and exchange distribution along chromosomes; variations in dominance of the employed markers; and use of different subsets of markers in different labs. Hence, it is necessary to handle arbitrary patterns of shared sets of markers and different level of mapping data quality. In this article, we introduce a two-phase approach for solving MCGM. In phase 1, for each dataset, multilocus ordering is performed combined with iterative jackknife resampling to evaluate the stability of marker orders. In this phase, the ordering problem is reduced to the well-known traveling salesperson problem (TSP). Namely, for each dataset, we look for order that gives minimum sum of recombination distances between adjacent markers. In phase 2, the optimal consensus order of shared markers is selected from the set of allowed orders and gives the minimal sum of total lengths of nonconflicting maps of the chromosome. This criterion may be used in different modifications to take into account the variation in quality of the original data (population size, marker quality, etc.). In the foregoing formulation, consensus mapping is considered as a specific version of TSP that can be referred to as "synchronized TSP." The conflicts detected after phase 1 are resolved using either a heuristic algorithm over the entire chromosome or an exact/heuristic algorithm applied subsequently to the revealed small non-overlapping regions with conflicts separated by non-conflicting regions. The proposed approach was tested on a wide range of simulated data and real datasets from maize.

Indexed as

consensus genetic mappingguided evolution strategy optimizationsynchronized marker ordering analysistwo-phase approach

Identifiers

PMID22670224
PMCPMC3362937

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.