4.7 Article

The Genome-wide Patterns of Variation Expose Significant Substructure in a Founder Population

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS
Volume 83, Issue 6, Pages 787-794

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.11.005

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [1R01HL087679-01]
  2. STAMPEED, GenomEUtwin [QLG2-CT-2002-01254]
  3. EU [LSHM-CT-2006-03 7761]
  4. Nordic Centre of Excellence in Disease Genetics (NCoEDG)
  5. Center of Excellence in Complex Disease Genetics of the Academy of Finland
  6. Helsinki University Finnish Genome Center
  7. National Center for Research Resources [U54 RR020278]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although high-density SNP genotyping platforms generate a momentum for detailed genome-wide association (GWA) studies, an offshoot is a new insight into population genetics. Here, we present an example in one of the best-known founder populations by scrutinizing ten distinct Finnish early- and late-settlement subpopulations. By determining genetic distances, homozygosity, and patterns of linkage disequilibrium, we demonstrate that population substructure, and even individual ancestry, is detectable at a very high resolution and Supports the concept of multiple historical bottlenecks resulting from consecutive founder effects. Given that genetic studies are currently aiming at identifying smaller and smaller genetic effects, recognizing and controlling for population substructure even at this fine level becomes imperative to avoid confounding and spurious associations. This study provides an example of the power of GWA data sets to demonstrate stratification caused by population history even within a seemingly homogeneous population, like the Finns. Further, the results provide interesting lessons concerning the impact of population history on the genome landscape of humans, as well as approaches to identify rare variants enriched in these subpopulations.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available