MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3007426492 · doi:10.1099/mgen.0.000337

Benchmarking bacterial genome-wide association study methods using simulated genomes and phenotypes

2020· article· en· W3007426492 sur OpenAlexafffund
Morteza M. Saber, B. Jesse Shapiro

Notice bibliographique

RevueMicrobial Genomics · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Établissements canadiensUniversité de Montréal
Organismes subventionnairesGénome QuébecGenome Canada
Mots-clésGenome-wide association studyBiologyGeneticsLocus (genetics)PopulationGenetic associationComputational biologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneGenotype

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Genome Wide Association Studies (GWASs) have the potential to reveal the genetics of microbial phenotypes such as antibiotic resistance and virulence. Capitalizing on the growing wealth of bacterial sequence data, microbial GWAS methods aim to identify causal genetic variants while ignoring spurious associations. Bacteria reproduce clonally, leading to strong population structure and genome-wide linkage, making it challenging to separate true “hits” (i.e. mutations that cause a phenotype) from non-causal linked mutations. GWAS methods attempt to correct for population structure in different ways, but their performance has not yet been systematically evaluated. Here we developed a bacterial GWAS simulator (BacGWASim) to generate bacterial genomes with varying rates of mutation, recombination, and other evolutionary parameters, along with a subset of causal mutations underlying a phenotype of interest. We assessed the performance (recall and precision) of three widely-used univariate GWAS approaches (cluster-based, dimensionality-reduction, and linear mixed models, implemented in PLINK, pySEER, and GEMMA) and one relatively new whole-genome elastic net model implemented in pySEER, across a range of simulated sample sizes, recombination rates, and causal mutation effect sizes. As expected, all methods performed better with larger sample sizes and effect sizes. The performance of clustering and dimensionality reduction approaches to correct for population structure were considerably variable according to the choice of parameters. Notably, the elastic net whole-genome model was consistently amongst the highest-performing methods and had the highest power in detecting causal variants with both low and high effect sizes. Most methods reached good performance (Recall > 0.75) to identify causal mutations of strong effect size (log Odds Ratio >= 2) with a sample size of 2000 genomes. However, only elastic nets reached reasonable performance (Recall = 0.35) for detecting markers with weaker effects (log OR ∼1) in smaller samples. Elastic nets also showed superior precision and recall in controlling for genome-wide linkage, relative to univariate models. However, all methods performed relatively poorly on highly clonal (low-recombining) genomes, suggesting room for improvement in method development. These findings show the potential for whole-genome models to improve bacterial GWAS performance. BacGWASim code and simulated data are publicly available to enable further comparisons and benchmarking of new methods. Author summary Microbial populations contain measurable phenotypic differences with important clinical and environmental consequences, such as antibiotic resistance, virulence, host preference and transmissibility. A major challenge is to discover the genes and mutations in bacterial genomes that control these phenotypes. Bacterial Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWASs) are family of methods to statistically associate phenotypes with genotypes, such as point mutations and other variants across the genome. However, compared to sexual organisms such as humans, bacteria reproduce clonally meaning that causal mutations tend to be strongly linked to other mutations on the same chromosome. This genome-wide linkage makes it challenging to statistically separate causal mutations from non-causal false-positive associations. Several GWAS methods are currently available, but it is not clear which is the most powerful and accurate for bacteria. To systematically evaluate these methods, we developed BacGWASim, a computational pipeline to simulate the evolution of bacterial genomes and phenotypes. Using simulated genomes, we found that GWAS methods varied widely in their performance. In general, causal mutations of strong effect ( e.g. those under strong selection for antibiotic resistance) could be easily identified with relatively small samples sizes of around 1000 genomes, but more complex phenotypes controlled by mutations of weaker effect required 3000 genomes or more. We found that a recently-developed GWAS method called elastic net was particularly good at identifying causal mutations in highly clonal populations, with strong linkage between mutations – but there is still room for improvement. The BacGWASim computer code is publicly available to enable further comparisons and benchmarking of new methods.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,012
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,988
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,063

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0120,028
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0020,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,272
Écart entre enseignants0,250 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
DomaineMéthodes
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations76
Publié2020
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueMicrobial Genomics→Même sujetGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies→Travaux en français237 207→