» Articles » PMID: 11593451

Large Upward Bias in Estimation of Locus-specific Effects from Genomewide Scans

Overview
Journal Am J Hum Genet
Publisher Cell Press
Specialty Genetics
Date 2001 Oct 11
PMID 11593451
Citations 179
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The primary goal of a genomewide scan is to estimate the genomic locations of genes influencing a trait of interest. It is sometimes said that a secondary goal is to estimate the phenotypic effects of each identified locus. Here, it is shown that these two objectives cannot be met reliably by use of a single data set of a currently realistic size. Simulation and analytical results, based on variance-components linkage analysis as an example, demonstrate that estimates of locus-specific effect size at genomewide LOD score peaks tend to be grossly inflated and can even be virtually independent of the true effect size, even for studies on large samples when the true effect size is small. However, the bias diminishes asymptotically. The explanation for the bias is that the LOD score is a function of the locus-specific effect-size estimate, such that there is a high correlation between the observed statistical significance and the effect-size estimate. When the LOD score is maximized over the many pointwise tests being conducted throughout the genome, the locus-specific effect-size estimate is therefore effectively maximized as well. We argue that attempts at bias correction give unsatisfactory results, and that pointwise estimation in an independent data set may be the only way of obtaining reliable estimates of locus-specific effect-and then only if one does not condition on statistical significance being obtained. We further show that the same factors causing this bias are responsible for frequent failures to replicate initial claims of linkage or association for complex traits, even when the initial localization is, in fact, correct. The findings of this study have wide-ranging implications, as they apply to all statistical methods of gene localization. It is hoped that, by keeping this bias in mind, we will more realistically interpret and extrapolate from the results of genomewide scans.

Citing Articles

Investigating Motor Coordination Using BXD Recombinant Inbred Mice to Model the Genetic Underpinnings of Developmental Coordination Disorder.

Rajan J, Gill K, Chow E, Ashbrook D, Williams R, Zwicker J Genes Brain Behav. 2025; 24(2):e70014.

PMID: 40071748 PMC: 11898013. DOI: 10.1111/gbb.70014.


Improving Replication in Endometrial Omics: Understanding the Influence of the Menstrual Cycle.

Chung J, Rogers P Int J Mol Sci. 2025; 26(2).

PMID: 39859570 PMC: 11766126. DOI: 10.3390/ijms26020857.


Associations Between TCF7L2, PPARγ, and KCNJ11 Genotypes and Insulin Response to an Oral Glucose Tolerance Test: A Systematic Review.

Blanken C, Bayer S, Buchner Carro S, Hauner H, Holzapfel C Mol Nutr Food Res. 2025; 69(3):e202400561.

PMID: 39828593 PMC: 11791742. DOI: 10.1002/mnfr.202400561.


Evaluating the Roles of Drift and Selection in Trait Loss along an Elevational Gradient.

Buysse S, Perez S, Puzey J, Garrison A, Bradburd G, Oakley C bioRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38915635 PMC: 11195200. DOI: 10.1101/2024.06.12.598645.


Glycemic traits and colorectal cancer survival in a cohort of South Korean patients: A Mendelian randomization analysis.

Jun S, Cho S, Kim M, Park J, Ryoo S, Jeong S Cancer Med. 2024; 13(5):e7084.

PMID: 38477501 PMC: 10935880. DOI: 10.1002/cam4.7084.


References
1.
Goring H, Terwilliger J . Linkage analysis in the presence of errors IV: joint pseudomarker analysis of linkage and/or linkage disequilibrium on a mixture of pedigrees and singletons when the mode of inheritance cannot be accurately specified. Am J Hum Genet. 2000; 66(4):1310-27. PMC: 1288197. DOI: 10.1086/302845. View

2.
Weiss K, Terwilliger J . How many diseases does it take to map a gene with SNPs?. Nat Genet. 2000; 26(2):151-7. DOI: 10.1038/79866. View

3.
Boehnke M, Greenberg D . The effects of conditioning on probands to correct for multiple ascertainment. Am J Hum Genet. 1984; 36(6):1298-308. PMC: 1684649. View

4.
Melchinger A, Utz H, Schon C . Quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping using different testers and independent population samples in maize reveals low power of QTL detection and large bias in estimates of QTL effects. Genetics. 1998; 149(1):383-403. PMC: 1460144. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/149.1.383. View

5.
Georges M, Nielsen D, MacKinnon M, Mishra A, Okimoto R, Pasquino A . Mapping quantitative trait loci controlling milk production in dairy cattle by exploiting progeny testing. Genetics. 1995; 139(2):907-20. PMC: 1206390. DOI: 10.1093/genetics/139.2.907. View