37
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Parentage and Sibship Inference From Multilocus Genotype Data Under Polygamy

      ,
      Genetics
      Genetics Society of America

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Likelihood methods have been developed to partition individuals in a sample into sibling clusters using genetic marker data without parental information. Most of these methods assume either both sexes are monogamous to infer full sibships only or only one sex is polygamous to infer full sibships and paternal or maternal (but not both) half sibships. We extend our previous method to the more general case of both sexes being polygamous to infer full sibships, paternal half sibships, and maternal half sibships and to the case of a two-generation sample of individuals to infer parentage jointly with sibships. The extension not only expands enormously the scope of application of the method, but also increases its statistical power. The method is implemented for both diploid and haplodiploid species and for codominant and dominant markers, with mutations and genotyping errors accommodated. The performance and robustness of the method are evaluated by analyzing both simulated and empirical data sets. Our method is shown to be much more powerful than pairwise methods in both parentage and sibship assignments because of the more efficient use of marker information. It is little affected by inbreeding in parents and is moderately robust to nonrandom mating and linkage of markers. We also show that individually much less informative markers, such as SNPs or AFLPs, can reach the same power for parentage and sibship inferences as the highly informative marker simple sequence repeats (SSRs), as long as a sufficient number of loci are employed in the analysis.

          Related collections

          Most cited references38

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations.

          Paternity inference using highly polymorphic codominant markers is becoming common in the study of natural populations. However, multiple males are often found to be genetically compatible with each offspring tested, even when the probability of excluding an unrelated male is high. While various methods exist for evaluating the likelihood of paternity of each nonexcluded male, interpreting these likelihoods has hitherto been difficult, and no method takes account of the incomplete sampling and error-prone genetic data typical of large-scale studies of natural systems. We derive likelihood ratios for paternity inference with codominant markers taking account of typing error, and define a statistic delta for resolving paternity. Using allele frequencies from the study population in question, a simulation program generates criteria for delta that permit assignment of paternity to the most likely male with a known level of statistical confidence. The simulation takes account of the number of candidate males, the proportion of males that are sampled and gaps and errors in genetic data. We explore the potentially confounding effect of relatives and show that the method is robust to their presence under commonly encountered conditions. The method is demonstrated using genetic data from the intensively studied red deer (Cervus elaphus) population on the island of Rum, Scotland. The Windows-based computer program, CERVUS, described in this study is available from the authors. CERVUS can be used to calculate allele frequencies, run simulations and perform parentage analysis using data from all types of codominant markers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book: not found

            Introduction to Conservation Genetics

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies.

              Genotyping errors occur when the genotype determined after molecular analysis does not correspond to the real genotype of the individual under consideration. Virtually every genetic data set includes some erroneous genotypes, but genotyping errors remain a taboo subject in population genetics, even though they might greatly bias the final conclusions, especially for studies based on individual identification. Here, we consider four case studies representing a large variety of population genetics investigations differing in their sampling strategies (noninvasive or traditional), in the type of organism studied (plant or animal) and the molecular markers used [microsatellites or amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs)]. In these data sets, the estimated genotyping error rate ranges from 0.8% for microsatellite loci from bear tissues to 2.6% for AFLP loci from dwarf birch leaves. Main sources of errors were allelic dropouts for microsatellites and differences in peak intensities for AFLPs, but in both cases human factors were non-negligible error generators. Therefore, tracking genotyping errors and identifying their causes are necessary to clean up the data sets and validate the final results according to the precision required. In addition, we propose the outline of a protocol designed to limit and quantify genotyping errors at each step of the genotyping process. In particular, we recommend (i) several efficient precautions to prevent contaminations and technical artefacts; (ii) systematic use of blind samples and automation; (iii) experience and rigor for laboratory work and scoring; and (iv) systematic reporting of the error rate in population genetics studies.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Genetics
                Genetics
                Genetics Society of America
                0016-6731
                1943-2631
                April 07 2009
                April 2009
                April 2009
                February 16 2009
                : 181
                : 4
                : 1579-1594
                Article
                10.1534/genetics.108.100214
                2666522
                19221199
                936fa94e-a25b-4a33-a004-0c1770fa7bef
                © 2009
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article