ArticleGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2022
Comparison of linkage disequilibrium estimated from genotypes versus haplotypes for crossbred populations.
Article in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLinkage disequilibrium (LD) is commonly measured based on the squared coefficient of correlation [Formula: see text] between the alleles at two loci that are carried by haplotypes. LD can also be estimated as the [Formula: see text] between unphased genotype dosage at two loci when the allele frequencies and inbreeding coefficients at both loci are identical for the parental lines. Here, we investigated whether [Formula: see text] for a crossbred population (F1) can be estimated using genotype data. The parental lines of the crossbred (F1) can be purebred or crossbred.
methodsWe approached this by first showing that inbreeding coefficients for an F1 crossbred population are negative, and typically differ in size between loci. Then, we proved that the expected [Formula: see text] computed from unphased genotype data is expected to be identical to the [Formula: see text] computed from haplotype data for an F1 crossbred population, regardless of the inbreeding coefficients at the two loci. Finally, we investigated the bias and precision of the [Formula: see text] estimated using unphased genotype versus haplotype data in stochastic simulation.
resultsOur findings show that estimates of [Formula: see text] based on haplotype and unphased genotype data are both unbiased for different combinations of allele frequencies, sample sizes (900, 1800, and 2700), and levels of LD. In general, for any allele frequency combination and [Formula: see text] value scenarios considered, and for both methods to estimate [Formula: see text], the precision of the estimates increased, and the bias of the estimates decreased as sample size increased, indicating that both estimators are consistent. For a given scenario, the [Formula: see text] estimates using haplotype data were more precise and less biased using haplotype data than using unphased genotype data. As sample size increased, the difference in precision and biasedness between the [Formula: see text] estimates using haplotype data and unphased genotype data decreased.
conclusionsOur theoretical derivations showed that estimates of LD between loci based on unphased genotypes and haplotypes in F1 crossbreds have identical expectations. Based on our simulation results, we conclude that the LD for an F1 crossbred population can be accurately estimated from unphased genotype data. The results also apply for other crosses (F2, F3, Fn, BC1, BC2, and BCn), as long as (selected) individuals from the two parental lines mate randomly.
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.