Selective Phenotyping for Increased Efficiency in Genetic Mapping Studies

The power of a genetic mapping study depends on the heritability of the trait, the number of individuals included in the analysis, and the genetic dissimilarity among them. In experiments that involve microarrays or other complex physiological assays, phenotyping can be expensive and time-consuming and may impose limits on the sample size. A random selection of individuals may not provide sufficient power to detect linkage until a large sample size is reached. We present an algorithm for selecting a subset of individuals solely on the basis of genotype data that can achieve substantial improvements in sensitivity compared to a random sample of the same size. The selective phenotyping method involves preferentially selecting individuals to maximize their genotypic dissimilarity. Selective phenotyping is most effective when prior knowledge of genetic architecture allows us to focus on specific genetic regions. However, it can also provide modest improvements in efficiency when applied on a whole-genome basis. Importantly, selective phenotyping does not reduce the efficiency of mapping as compared to a random sample in regions that are not considered in the selection process. In contrast to selective genotyping, inferences based solely on a selectively phenotyped population of individuals are representative of the whole population. The substantial improvement introduced by selective phenotyping is particularly useful when phenotyping is difficult or costly and thus limits the sample size in a genetic mapping study.

[1]  E. Lander,et al.  Mapping mendelian factors underlying quantitative traits using RFLP linkage maps. , 1989, Genetics.

[2]  Hao Wu,et al.  R/qtl: QTL Mapping in Experimental Crosses , 2003, Bioinform..

[3]  David BotsteinS’B Mapping Mendelian Factors Underlying Quantitative Traits Using RFLP Linkage Maps , 2002 .

[4]  R. Stoughton,et al.  Genetics of gene expression surveyed in maize, mouse and man , 2003, Nature.

[5]  R. Spielman,et al.  Natural variation in human gene expression assessed in lymphoblastoid cells , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[6]  Karl W. Broman,et al.  A model selection approach for the identification of quantitative trait loci in experimental crosses , 2002 .

[7]  B. Yandell,et al.  Dimension reduction for mapping mRNA abundance as quantitative traits. , 2003, Genetics.

[8]  L. Kruglyak,et al.  Genetic Dissection of Transcriptional Regulation in Budding Yeast , 2002, Science.

[9]  R. Doerge Multifactorial genetics: Mapping and analysis of quantitative trait loci in experimental populations , 2002, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[10]  Rachel B. Brem,et al.  Trans-acting regulatory variation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and the role of transcription factors , 2003, Nature Genetics.

[11]  B. Yandell,et al.  Genetic obesity unmasks nonlinear interactions between murine type 2 diabetes susceptibility loci. , 2000, Diabetes.

[12]  B. Bochner Innovations: New technologies to assess genotype–phenotype relationships , 2003, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[13]  L Sun,et al.  Statistical tests for detection of misspecified relationships by use of genome-screen data. , 2000, American journal of human genetics.

[14]  M. Sillanpää,et al.  Bayesian analysis of genetic differentiation between populations. , 2003, Genetics.

[15]  S. Fairweather-Tait,et al.  Can a double isotope method be used to measure fractional zinc absorption from urinary samples? , 1997, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

[16]  M. Daly,et al.  MAPMAKER: an interactive computer package for constructing primary genetic linkage maps of experimental and natural populations. , 1987, Genomics.

[17]  J. Nap,et al.  Genetical genomics : the added value from segregation , 2001 .

[18]  Timothy E. O'Brien,et al.  A Gentle Introduction to Optimal Design for Regression Models , 2003 .

[19]  R. Doerge,et al.  Empirical threshold values for quantitative trait mapping. , 1994, Genetics.