4.2 Article

Genotype imputation in the domestic dog

期刊

MAMMALIAN GENOME
卷 27, 期 9-10, 页码 485-494

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00335-016-9636-9

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [5T32OD011130-07]
  2. Poodle Club of America Foundation
  3. American Kennel Club Canine Health Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Application of imputation methods to accurately predict a dense array of SNP genotypes in the dog could provide an important supplement to current analyses of array-based genotyping data. Here, we developed a reference panel of 4,885,283 SNPs in 83 dogs across 15 breeds using whole genome sequencing. We used this panel to predict the genotypes of 268 dogs across three breeds with 84,193 SNP array-derived genotypes as inputs. We then (1) performed breed clustering of the actual and imputed data; (2) evaluated several reference panel breed combinations to determine an optimal reference panel composition; and (3) compared the accuracy of two commonly used software algorithms (Beagle and IMPUTE2). Breed clustering was well preserved in the imputation process across eigenvalues representing 75 % of the variation in the imputed data. Using Beagle with a target panel from a single breed, genotype concordance was highest using a multi-breed reference panel (92.4 %) compared to a breed-specific reference panel (87.0 %) or a reference panel containing no breeds overlapping with the target panel (74.9 %). This finding was confirmed using target panels derived from two other breeds. Additionally, using the multi-breed reference panel, genotype concordance was slightly higher with IMPUTE2 (94.1 %) compared to Beagle; Pearson correlation coefficients were slightly higher for both software packages (0.946 for Beagle, 0.961 for IMPUTE2). Our findings demonstrate that genotype imputation from SNP array-derived data to whole genome-level genotypes is both feasible and accurate in the dog with appropriate breed overlap between the target and reference panels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据