Display options
Cite
Goldgar DE, Shugart YY. Multipoint genomic scanning for quantitative loci: effects of map density, sibship size and computational approach. Eur J Hum Genet. 1999;7(2):103-9doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200280.
Goldgar, D. E., & Shugart, Y. Y. (1999). Multipoint genomic scanning for quantitative loci: effects of map density, sibship size and computational approach. European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 7(2), 103-9. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200280
Goldgar, D E, and Shugart, Y Y. "Multipoint genomic scanning for quantitative loci: effects of map density, sibship size and computational approach." European journal of human genetics : EJHG vol. 7,2 (1999): 103-9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200280
Goldgar DE, Shugart YY. Multipoint genomic scanning for quantitative loci: effects of map density, sibship size and computational approach. Eur J Hum Genet. 1999 Feb-Mar;7(2):103-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200280. PMID: 10196691.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on
Full text links
Nature Publishing Group

Eur J Hum Genet. 1999 Feb-Mar;7(2):103-9. doi: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200280.

Multipoint genomic scanning for quantitative loci: effects of map density, sibship size and computational approach.

European journal of human genetics : EJHG

D E Goldgar, Y Y Shugart

Affiliations

  1. Department of Family Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology, University of Pittsburgh, PA, USA. [email protected]

PMID: 10196691 DOI: 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200280

Abstract

Multipoint interval mapping (MIM) and the MAPMAKER/SIBS program (M/S) are two methods of mapping quantitative loci by examining identity by descent (IBD) sharing in a region spanned by multiple microsatellite DNA markers. For the purpose of comparison, we simulated a quantitative trait controlled by a two-locus model, and evaluated the power and genome-wide false positive rate of both approaches. Based on our simulation, we examined the effects of marker density (5 cM, 10 cM and 20 cM) and sibship size (2, 3, 4 and 5) on the power to detect linkage. Our results indicate that a 10 cM map provides the optimal trade-off between power and type I error, and that the power of MIM increases with sibship size and, in general, performs better than MAPMAKER/SIBS. Furthermore, we conclude that using a reasonable sample of randomly ascertained sibships, it is possible to map a quantitative trait locus (QTL) which accounts for 25% of the phenotypic variance.

MeSH terms

Publication Types

Grant support

LinkOut - more resources