IF 3.6 1区 农林科学 Q1 AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE Genetics Selection Evolution Pub Date : 2025-02-27 DOI:10.1186/s12711-025-00959-1
Afees A. Ajasa, Hans M. Gjøen, Solomon A. Boison, Marie Lillehammer
{"title":"Genome-wide association analysis using multiple Atlantic salmon populations","authors":"Afees A. Ajasa, Hans M. Gjøen, Solomon A. Boison, Marie Lillehammer","doi":"10.1186/s12711-025-00959-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a previous study, we found low persistence of linkage disequilibrium (LD) phase across breeding populations of Atlantic salmon. Accordingly, we observed no increase in accuracy from combining these populations for genomic prediction. In this study, we aimed to examine if the same were true for detection power in genome-wide association studies (GWAS), in terms of reduction in p-values, and if the precision of mapping quantitative trait loci (QTL) would improve from such analysis. Since individual records may not always be available, e.g. due to proprietorship or confidentiality, we also compared mega-analysis and meta-analysis. Mega-analysis needs access to all individual records, whereas meta-analysis utilizes parameters, such as p-values or allele substitution effects, from multiple studies or populations. Furthermore, different methods for determining the presence or absence of independent or secondary signals, such as conditional association analysis, approximate conditional and joint analysis (COJO), and the clumping approach, were assessed. Mega-analysis resulted in increased detection power, in terms of reduction in p-values, and increased precision, compared to the within-population GWAS. Only one QTL was detected using conditional association analysis, both within populations and in mega-analysis, while the number of QTL detected with COJO and the clumping approach ranged from 1 to 19. The allele substitution effect and -log10p-values obtained from mega-analysis were highly correlated with the corresponding values from various meta-analysis methods. Compared to mega-analysis, a higher detection power and reduced precision were obtained with the meta-analysis methods. Our results show that combining multiple datasets or populations in a mega-analysis can increase detection power and mapping precision. With meta-analysis, a higher detection power was obtained compared to mega-analysis. However, care must be taken in the interpretation of the meta-analysis results from multiple populations because their test statistics might be inflated due to population structure or cryptic relatedness.","PeriodicalId":55120,"journal":{"name":"Genetics Selection Evolution","volume":"210 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetics Selection Evolution","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12711-025-00959-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRICULTURE, DAIRY & ANIMAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在之前的一项研究中,我们发现大西洋鲑繁殖种群间的连锁不平衡(LD)相位持续性较低。因此,我们发现结合这些种群进行基因组预测的准确性并没有提高。在这项研究中,我们的目的是考察全基因组关联研究(GWAS)的检测能力是否也是如此,即 p 值是否会降低,以及绘制定量性状位点(QTL)的精确度是否会从此类分析中得到提高。由于个人记录不一定总能获得,例如由于所有权或保密原因,我们还对巨型分析和元分析进行了比较。巨量分析需要获取所有的个体记录,而元分析则利用多个研究或群体的参数,如 p 值或等位基因替代效应。此外,还评估了确定是否存在独立或次要信号的不同方法,如条件关联分析、近似条件和联合分析(COJO)以及聚类方法。与群体内 GWAS 相比,巨量分析在降低 p 值方面提高了检测能力,并提高了精确度。在种群内和大规模分析中,使用条件关联分析只检测到一个 QTL,而使用 COJO 和聚类方法检测到的 QTL 数量从 1 个到 19 个不等。大型分析得出的等位基因替代效应和-log10p-值与各种元分析方法得出的相应值高度相关。与巨量分析相比,荟萃分析方法的检测能力更高,精确度更低。我们的研究结果表明,在超大规模分析中结合多个数据集或人群可以提高检测能力和绘图精度。与超大规模分析相比,元分析的检测能力更高。然而,在解释来自多个种群的荟萃分析结果时必须小心谨慎,因为种群结构或隐性亲缘关系可能会导致测试统计量膨胀。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Genome-wide association analysis using multiple Atlantic salmon populations
In a previous study, we found low persistence of linkage disequilibrium (LD) phase across breeding populations of Atlantic salmon. Accordingly, we observed no increase in accuracy from combining these populations for genomic prediction. In this study, we aimed to examine if the same were true for detection power in genome-wide association studies (GWAS), in terms of reduction in p-values, and if the precision of mapping quantitative trait loci (QTL) would improve from such analysis. Since individual records may not always be available, e.g. due to proprietorship or confidentiality, we also compared mega-analysis and meta-analysis. Mega-analysis needs access to all individual records, whereas meta-analysis utilizes parameters, such as p-values or allele substitution effects, from multiple studies or populations. Furthermore, different methods for determining the presence or absence of independent or secondary signals, such as conditional association analysis, approximate conditional and joint analysis (COJO), and the clumping approach, were assessed. Mega-analysis resulted in increased detection power, in terms of reduction in p-values, and increased precision, compared to the within-population GWAS. Only one QTL was detected using conditional association analysis, both within populations and in mega-analysis, while the number of QTL detected with COJO and the clumping approach ranged from 1 to 19. The allele substitution effect and -log10p-values obtained from mega-analysis were highly correlated with the corresponding values from various meta-analysis methods. Compared to mega-analysis, a higher detection power and reduced precision were obtained with the meta-analysis methods. Our results show that combining multiple datasets or populations in a mega-analysis can increase detection power and mapping precision. With meta-analysis, a higher detection power was obtained compared to mega-analysis. However, care must be taken in the interpretation of the meta-analysis results from multiple populations because their test statistics might be inflated due to population structure or cryptic relatedness.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Genetics Selection Evolution
Genetics Selection Evolution 生物-奶制品与动物科学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
9.80%
发文量
74
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Genetics Selection Evolution invites basic, applied and methodological content that will aid the current understanding and the utilization of genetic variability in domestic animal species. Although the focus is on domestic animal species, research on other species is invited if it contributes to the understanding of the use of genetic variability in domestic animals. Genetics Selection Evolution publishes results from all levels of study, from the gene to the quantitative trait, from the individual to the population, the breed or the species. Contributions concerning both the biological approach, from molecular genetics to quantitative genetics, as well as the mathematical approach, from population genetics to statistics, are welcome. Specific areas of interest include but are not limited to: gene and QTL identification, mapping and characterization, analysis of new phenotypes, high-throughput SNP data analysis, functional genomics, cytogenetics, genetic diversity of populations and breeds, genetic evaluation, applied and experimental selection, genomic selection, selection efficiency, and statistical methodology for the genetic analysis of phenotypes with quantitative and mixed inheritance.
期刊最新文献
Multitrait genome-wide association best linear unbiased prediction of genetic values Erosion of estimated genomic breeding values with generations is due to long distance associations between markers and QTL Molecular breeding of pigs in the genome editing era Genomic selection in pig breeding: comparative analysis of machine learning algorithms Merging metabolomics and genomics provides a catalog of genetic factors that influence molecular phenotypes in pigs linking relevant metabolic pathways
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1