fast expectation-maximum algorithm for fine-scale QTL mapping
The recent technology of the single-nucleotide-polymorphism (SNP) array makes it possible to genotype millions of SNP markers on genome, which in turn requires to develop fast and efficient method for fine-scale quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping. The single-marker association (SMA) is the simple...
        Saved in:
      
    
          | Published in | Theoretical and applied genetics Vol. 125; no. 8; pp. 1727 - 1734 | 
|---|---|
| Main Author | |
| Format | Journal Article | 
| Language | English | 
| Published | 
        Berlin/Heidelberg
          Springer-Verlag
    
        01.12.2012
     Springer Springer Nature B.V  | 
| Subjects | |
| Online Access | Get full text | 
| ISSN | 0040-5752 1432-2242 1432-2242  | 
| DOI | 10.1007/s00122-012-1949-9 | 
Cover
| Summary: | The recent technology of the single-nucleotide-polymorphism (SNP) array makes it possible to genotype millions of SNP markers on genome, which in turn requires to develop fast and efficient method for fine-scale quantitative trait loci (QTL) mapping. The single-marker association (SMA) is the simplest method for fine-scale QTL mapping, but it usually shows many false-positive signals and has low QTL-detection power. Compared with SMA, the haplotype-based method of Meuwissen and Goddard who assume QTL effect to be random and estimate variance components (VC) with identity-by-descent (IBD) matrices that inferred from unknown historic population is more powerful for fine-scale QTL mapping; furthermore, their method also tends to show continuous QTL-detection profile to diminish many false-positive signals. However, as we know, the variance component estimation is usually very time consuming and difficult to converge. Thus, an extremely fast EMF (Expectation-Maximization algorithm under Fixed effect model) is proposed in this research, which assumes a biallelic QTL and uses an expectation-maximization (EM) algorithm to solve model effects. The results of simulation experiments showed that (1) EMF was computationally much faster than VC method; (2) EMF and VC performed similarly in QTL detection power and parameter estimations, and both outperformed the paired-marker analysis and SMA. However, the power of EMF would be lower than that of VC if the QTL was multiallelic. | 
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00122-012-1949-9 ObjectType-Article-2 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-1 content type line 14 ObjectType-Article-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23  | 
| ISSN: | 0040-5752 1432-2242 1432-2242  | 
| DOI: | 10.1007/s00122-012-1949-9 |