4.5 Article

Multiple loci in silico mapping in inbred lines

Journal

HEREDITY
Volume 103, Issue 4, Pages 346-354

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/hdy.2009.66

Keywords

in silico mapping; linkage disequilibrium; penalized maximum likelihood; identity-by-state; false-positive rate

Funding

  1. National Basic Research Program of China [2006CB101708]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30671333]
  3. Jiangsu Natural Science Foundation [BK2008335]
  4. NCET [NCET-05-0489]
  5. 863 program [2006AA10Z1E5]
  6. 111 Project [B08025]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The in silico mapping (ISM) technique and its extension represent major advances for novel gene discovery in germplasm resources of inbred lines. However, the techniques suffer from a relatively high false-positive rate (FPR) and they do not consider the effect of linkage disequilibrium (LD) markers around the identified quantitative trait locus (QTL). In addition, it has not yet been established whether it is optimal to use absolute trait differences as the response variable. To address these problems, this article presents the multiple loci ISM (MLISM) approach, which uses all markers on the entire genome, along with a penalized maximum likelihood. The method proposed here was verified by a series of simulation experiments with a maize pedigree population of inbred lines of known ancestry. Results from the simulated studies show that the best response variable is the trait product. The MLISM FPR is substantially decreased and the proportion of the number of false QTL to the number of LD markers around the identified QTL is adequately reduced. The MLISM method, with the trait product as the response variable, is an improvement on the existing methods for novel QTL mapping in germplasm resources of inbred lines. Heredity (2009) 103, 346-354; doi: 10.1038/hdy.2009.66; published online 3 June 2009

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available