4.3 Article

Haplotype variation and genotype imputation in African populations

期刊

GENETIC EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 35, 期 8, 页码 766-780

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/gepi.20626

关键词

haplotype variation; imputation; linkage disequilibrium

资金

  1. Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  2. National Institutes of Health [R01 GM081441, R01 HG005855, R01 GM076637]
  3. Director's Pioneer Award Program [DP-1-OD-006445]
  4. Division Of Behavioral and Cognitive Sci
  5. Direct For Social, Behav & Economic Scie [0827436] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Sub-Saharan Africa has been identified as the part of the world with the greatest human genetic diversity. This high level of diversity causes difficulties for genome-wide association (GWA) studies in African populationsfor example, by reducing the accuracy of genotype imputation in African populations compared to non-African populations. Here, we investigate haplotype variation and imputation in Africa, using 253 unrelated individuals from 15 Sub-Saharan African populations. We identify the populations that provide the greatest potential for serving as reference panels for imputing genotypes in the remaining groups. Considering reference panels comprising samples of recent African descent in Phase 3 of the HapMap Project, we identify mixtures of reference groups that produce the maximal imputation accuracy in each of the sampled populations. We find that optimal HapMap mixtures and maximal imputation accuracies identified in detailed tests of imputation procedures can instead be predicted by using simple summary statistics that measure relationships between the pattern of genetic variation in a target population and the patterns in potential reference panels. Our results provide an empirical basis for facilitating the selection of reference panels in GWA studies of diverse human populations, especially those of African ancestry. Genet. Epidemiol. 35:766780, 2011. (C) 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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

4.3
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