Presence Of Genotyping Errors Research Articles

Estimating haplotype frequencies in pooled DNA samples when there is genotyping error

BackgroundMaximum likelihood estimates of haplotype frequencies can be obtained from pooled DNA using the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm. Through simulation, we investigate the effect of genotyping error on the accuracy of haplotype frequency estimates obtained using this algorithm. We explore model parameters including allele frequency, inter-marker linkage disequilibrium (LD), genotyping error rate, and pool size.ResultsPool sizes of 2, 5, and 10 individuals achieved comparable levels of accuracy in the estimation procedure. Common marker allele frequencies and no inter-marker LD result in less accurate estimates. This pattern is observed regardless of the amount of genotyping error simulated.ConclusionGenotyping error slightly decreases the accuracy of haplotype frequency estimates. However, the EM algorithm performs well even in the presence of genotyping error. Overall, pools of 2, 5, and 10 individuals yield similar accuracy of the haplotype frequency estimates, while reducing costs due to genotyping.

Testing for association with a case-parents design in the presence of genotyping errors.

Genotyping errors can create a problem for the analysis of case-parents data because some families will exhibit genotypes that are inconsistent with Mendelian inheritance. The problem with correcting Mendelian inconsistent genotype errors by regenotyping or removing families in which they occur is that the remaining unidentified genotype errors can produce excess type I (false positive) error for some family-based tests for association. We address this problem by developing a likelihood ratio test (LRT) for association in a case-parents design that incorporates nuisance parameters for a general genotype error model. We extend the likelihood approach for a single SNP to include short haplotypes consisting of 2 or 3 SNPs. The extension to haplotypes is based on assumptions of random mating, multiplicative penetrances, and at most a single genotype error per family. For a single SNP, we found, using Monte Carlo simulation, that type I error rate can be controlled for a number of genotype error models at different error rates. Simulation results suggest the same is true for 2 and 3 SNPs. In all cases, power declined with increasing genotyping error rates. In the absence of genotyping errors, power was similar whether nuisance parameters for genotype error were included in the LRT or not. The LRT developed here does not require prior specification of a particular model for genotype errors and it can be readily computed using the EM algorithm. Consequently, this test may be generally useful as a test of association with case-parents data in which Mendelian inconsistent families are observed.

Bayesian trio models for association in the presence of genotyping errors.

Errors in genotyping can greatly affect family-based association studies. If a mendelian inconsistency is detected, the family is usually removed from the analysis. This reduces power, and may introduce bias. In addition, a large proportion of genotyping errors remain undetected, and these also reduce power. We present a Bayesian framework for performing association studies with SNP data on samples of trios consisting of parents with an affected offspring, while allowing for the presence of both detectable and undetectable genotyping errors. This framework also allows for the inclusion of missing genotypes. Associations between the SNP and disease were modelled in terms of the genotypic relative risks. The performances of the analysis methods were investigated under a variety of models for disease association and genotype error, looking at both power to detect association and precision of genotypic relative risk estimates. As expected, power to detect association decreased as genotyping error probability increased. Importantly, however, analyses allowing for genotyping error had similar power to standard analyses when applied to data without genotyping error. Furthermore, allowing for genotyping error yielded relative risk estimates that were approximately unbiased, together with 95% credible intervals giving approximately correct coverage. The methods were also applied to a real dataset: a sample of schizophrenia cases and their parents genotyped at SNPs in the dysbindin gene. The analysis methods presented here require no prior information on the genotyping error probabilities, and may be fitted in WinBUGS.

Power of multifactor dimensionality reduction for detecting gene-gene interactions in the presence of genotyping error, missing data, phenocopy, and genetic heterogeneity.

The identification and characterization of genes that influence the risk of common, complex multifactorial diseases, primarily through interactions with other genes and other environmental factors, remains a statistical and computational challenge in genetic epidemiology. This challenge is partly due to the limitations of parametric statistical methods for detecting genetic effects that are dependent solely or partially on interactions with other genes and environmental exposures. We previously introduced multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) as a method for reducing the dimensionality of multilocus genotype information to improve the identification of polymorphism combinations associated with disease risk. The MDR approach is nonparametric (i.e., no hypothesis about the value of a statistical parameter is made), is model-free (i.e., assumes no particular inheritance model), and is directly applicable to case-control and discordant sib-pair study designs. Both empirical and theoretical studies suggest that MDR has excellent power for identifying high-order gene-gene interactions. However, the power of MDR for identifying gene-gene interactions in the presence of common sources of noise is not currently known. The goal of this study was to evaluate the power of MDR for identifying gene-gene interactions in the presence of noise due to genotyping error, missing data, phenocopy, and genetic or locus heterogeneity. Using simulated data, we show that MDR has high power to identify gene-gene interactions in the presence of 5% genotyping error, 5% missing data, or a combination of both. However, MDR has reduced power for some models in the presence of 50% phenocopy, and very limited power in the presence of 50% genetic heterogeneity. Extending MDR to address genetic heterogeneity should be a priority for the continued methodological development of this new approach.

Haplotype Frequency Estimation in the Presence of Genotyping Errors

Several statistical methods have been proposed to estimate haplotype frequencies, either based on unrelated individuals or based on families. These estimates may yield insights on population genetics as well as associations between candidate regions and disease of interest. One limitation of the existing methods is that all these methods make the implicit assumption that there are no genotyping errors. However, genotyping errors are unavoidable in practice. Numerous methods have been developed to incorporate genotyping errors in genetic studies, but none to date have addressed the issues of haplotype inference in the presence of genotyping errors. In this article, we develop statistical methods for haplotype inference incorporating genotyping errors. We describe how our methods can be applied to analyze unrelated individuals as well as nuclear families. Our simulation results show that the proposed methods perform well in the presence of genotyping errors.

The impact of genotyping error on haplotype reconstruction and frequency estimation.

The choice of genotyping families vs unrelated individuals is a critical factor in any large-scale linkage disequilibrium (LD) study. The use of unrelated individuals for such studies is promising, but in contrast to family designs, unrelated samples do not facilitate detection of genotyping errors, which have been shown to be of great importance for LD and linkage studies and may be even more important in genotyping collaborations across laboratories. Here we employ some of the most commonly-used analysis methods to examine the relative accuracy of haplotype estimation using families vs unrelateds in the presence of genotyping error. The results suggest that even slight amounts of genotyping error can significantly decrease haplotype frequency and reconstruction accuracy, that the ability to detect such errors in large families is essential when the number/complexity of haplotypes is high (low LD/common alleles). In contrast, in situations of low haplotype complexity (high LD and/or many rare alleles) unrelated individuals offer such a high degree of accuracy that there is little reason for less efficient family designs. Moreover, parent-child trios, which comprise the most popular family design and the most efficient in terms of the number of founder chromosomes per genotype but which contain little information for error detection, offer little or no gain over unrelated samples in nearly all cases, and thus do not seem a useful sampling compromise between unrelated individuals and large families. The implications of these results are discussed in the context of large-scale LD mapping projects such as the proposed genome-wide haplotype map.

Detection and Integration of Genotyping Errors in Statistical Genetics

Detection of genotyping errors and integration of such errors in statistical analysis are relatively neglected topics, given their importance in gene mapping. A few inopportunely placed errors, if ignored, can tremendously affect evidence for linkage. The present study takes a fresh look at the calculation of pedigree likelihoods in the presence of genotyping error. To accommodate genotyping error, we present extensions to the Lander-Green-Kruglyak deterministic algorithm for small pedigrees and to the Markov-chain Monte Carlo stochastic algorithm for large pedigrees. These extensions can accommodate a variety of error models and refrain from simplifying assumptions, such as allowing, at most, one error per pedigree. In principle, almost any statistical genetic analysis can be performed taking errors into account, without actually correcting or deleting suspect genotypes. Three examples illustrate the possibilities. These examples make use of the full pedigree data, multiple linked markers, and a prior error model. The first example is the estimation of genotyping error rates from pedigree data. The second-and currently most useful-example is the computation of posterior mistyping probabilities. These probabilities cover both Mendelian-consistent and Mendelian-inconsistent errors. The third example is the selection of the true pedigree structure connecting a group of people from among several competing pedigree structures. Paternity testing and twin zygosity testing are typical applications.

The Effect That Genotyping Errors Have on the Robustness of Common Linkage-Disequilibrium Measures

The rapid development of a dense single-nucleotide-polymorphism marker map has stimulated numerous studies attempting to characterize the magnitude and distribution of background linkage disequilibrium (LD) within and between human populations. Although genotyping errors are an inherent problem in all LD studies, there have been few systematic investigations documenting their consequences on estimates of background LD. Therefore, we derived simple deterministic formulas to investigate the effect that genotyping errors have on four commonly used LD measures-D', r, Q, and d-in studies of background LD. We have found that genotyping error rates as small as 3% can have serious affects on these LD measures, depending on the allele frequencies and the assumed error model. Furthermore, we compared the robustness of D', r, Q, and d, in the presence of genotyping errors. In general, Q and d are more robust than D' and r, although exceptions do exist. Finally, through stochastic simulations, we illustrate how genotyping errors can lead to erroneous inferences when measures of LD between two samples are compared.

The effects of genotyping errors and interference on estimation of genetic distance.

Analysis of linkage data has typically been carried out assuming genotyping errors are absent. Recent studies have shown, however, that the impact of ignoring genotyping errors can be great, especially in dense marker maps [Buetow, Am J Hum Genet 1991; 49:985-994; Lincoln and Lander, Genomics 1992; 14:604-610]. Because most organisms exhibit positive chiasma interference, we use the chi 2 model [Foss et al., Genetics 1993; 144:681-691] to examine the role interference plays in the estimation of genetic distance in the presence of genotyping errors. For simplicity, we confine our analyses to samples of 1,000 fully informative gametes. Our results support previous findings that ignoring errors inflates distance estimates. The larger the error rate, the greater the inflation. For a given error rate, the relative error in estimated genetic distance is greatest when interference is known to be weak or absent. An approximation to relative error which quantifies the relation to distance, error rate, and interference is provided. Robustness of estimation to error misspecification is also investigated. When the assumed error rate is too low, distance is overestimated while interference is underestimated. The situation is reversed when too large an error rate is assumed (interference is overestimated, and distance underestimated). Unfortunately, the joint estimation of distance and interference is not very robust to error misspecification.