Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30833959›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2019

Finding the Optimal Imputation Strategy for Small Cattle Populations.

Paula Korkuć, Danny Arends, Gudrun A Brockmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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.

Paula KorkućAnimal Breeding Biology and Molecular Genetics, Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute for Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Danny ArendsAnimal Breeding Biology and Molecular Genetics, Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute for Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Gudrun A BrockmannAnimal Breeding Biology and Molecular Genetics, Albrecht Daniel Thaer-Institute for Agricultural and Horticultural Sciences, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The imputation from lower density SNP chip genotypes to whole-genome sequence level is an established approach to generate high density genotypes for many individuals. Imputation accuracy is dependent on many factors and for small cattle populations such as the endangered German Black Pied cattle (DSN), determining the optimal imputation strategy is especially challenging since only a low number of high density genotypes is available. In this paper, the accuracy of imputation was explored with regard to (1) phasing of the target population and the reference panel for imputation, (2) comparison of a 1-step imputation approach, where 50 k genotypes are directly imputed to sequence level, to a 2-step imputation approach that used an intermediate step imputing first to 700 k and subsequently to sequence level, (3) the software tools Beagle and Minimac, and (4) the size and composition of the reference panel for imputation. Analyses were performed for 30 DSN and 30 Holstein Frisian cattle available from the 1000 Bull Genomes Project. Imputation accuracy was assessed using a leave-one-out cross validation procedure. We observed that phasing of the target populations and the reference panels affects the imputation accuracy significantly. Minimac reached higher accuracy when imputing using small reference panels, while Beagle performed better with larger reference panels. In contrast to previous research, we found that when a low number of animals is available at the intermediate imputation step, the 1-step imputation approach yielded higher imputation accuracy compared to a 2-step imputation. Overall, the size of the reference panel for imputation is the most important factor leading to higher imputation accuracy, although using a larger reference panel consisting of a related but different breed (Holstein Frisian) significantly reduced imputation accuracy. Our findings provide specific recommendations for populations with a limited number of high density genotyped or sequenced animals available such as DSN. The overall recommendation when imputing a small population are to (1) use a large reference panel of the same breed, (2) use a large reference panel consisting of diverse breeds, or (3) when a large reference panel is not available, we recommend using a smaller same breed reference panel without including a different related breed.

Indexed as

1000 Bull Genomes ProjectcattleDSNHolsteinimputationsequencingSNPSNP chip

Identifiers

PMID30833959
PMCPMC6387911

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.