Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32131735›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2020

Concordance rate between copy number variants detected using either high- or medium-density single nucleotide polymorphism genotype panels and the potential of imputing copy number variants from flanking high density single nucleotide polymorphism haplotypes in cattle.

Pierce Rafter, Isobel Claire Gormley, Andrew C Parnell, John Francis Kearney, Donagh P Berry

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Copy Number Variation (CNV): A New Genomic Insight in Horses.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Pierce RafterAnimal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
Isobel Claire GormleyUCD School of Mathematics and Statistics, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
Andrew C ParnellUCD School of Mathematics and Statistics, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland.
John Francis KearneyIrish Cattle Breeding Federation, Highfield House, Shinagh, Bandon, Co., Cork, Ireland.
Donagh P BerryAnimal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland. Donagh.Berry@teagasc.ie.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4349-1447
University College Dublin · IETeagasc - The Irish Agriculture and Food Development Authority · IE

Funding

Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine (IE) 16/RC/3835Science Foundation Ireland 14/IA/2576Science Foundation Ireland 16/RC/3835
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe trading of individual animal genotype information often involves only the exchange of the called genotypes and not necessarily the additional information required to effectively call structural variants. The main aim here was to determine if it is possible to impute copy number variants (CNVs) using the flanking single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) haplotype structure in cattle. While this objective was achieved using high-density genotype panels (i.e., 713,162 SNPs), a secondary objective investigated the concordance of CNVs called with this high-density genotype panel compared to CNVs called from a medium-density panel (i.e., 45,677 SNPs in the present study). This is the first study to compare CNVs called from high-density and medium-density SNP genotypes from the same animals. High (and medium-density) genotypes were available on 991 Holstein-Friesian, 1015 Charolais, and 1394 Limousin bulls. The concordance between CNVs called from the medium-density and high-density genotypes were calculated separately for each animal. A subset of CNVs which were called from the high-density genotypes was selected for imputation. Imputation was carried out separately for each breed using a set of high-density SNPs flanking the midpoint of each CNV. A CNV was deemed to be imputed correctly when the called copy number matched the imputed copy number.

resultsFor 97.0% of CNVs called from the high-density genotypes, the corresponding genomic position on the medium-density of the animal did not contain a called CNV. The average accuracy of imputation for CNV deletions was 0.281, with a standard deviation of 0.286. The average accuracy of imputation of the CNV normal state, i.e. the absence of a CNV, was 0.982 with a standard deviation of 0.022. Two CNV duplications were imputed in the Charolais, a single CNV duplication in the Limousins, and a single CNV duplication in the Holstein-Friesians; in all cases the CNV duplications were incorrectly imputed.

conclusionThe vast majority of CNVs called from the high-density genotypes were not detected using the medium-density genotypes. Furthermore, CNVs cannot be accurately predicted from flanking SNP haplotypes, at least based on the imputation algorithms routinely used in cattle, and using the SNPs currently available on the high-density genotype panel.

Indexed as

DNA Copy Number VariationsPolymorphism, Single NucleotideAlgorithmsAllelesAnimalsCattleComputational BiologyGene FrequencyGenotypeHaplotypesBeagleBovineCNVFImputeImputationPennCNVQuantiSNPSNP

Identifiers

PMID32131735
PMCPMC7057620
OpenAlexW3011291019

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.