Detecting Linkage between a Trait and a Marker in a Random Mating Population without Pedigree Record
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Modern linkage-based approaches employing extended pedigrees are becoming powerful tools for localizing complex quantitative trait loci. For these linkage mapping methods, it is necessary to reconstruct extended pedigrees which include living individuals, using extensive pedigree records. Unfortunately, such records are not always easy to obtain and application of the linkage-based approaches has been restricted. Within a finite population under random mating, latent inbreeding rather than non-random inbreeding by consanguineous marriages is expected to occur and is attributable to coalescence in a finite population. Interestingly, it has been revealed that significant random inbreeding exists even in general human populations. Random inbreeding should be used to detect the hidden coancestry between individuals for a particular chromosomal position and it could also have application in linkage mapping methods. Here we present a novel method, named finite population based linkage mapping (FPL) method, to detect linkage between a quantitative trait and a marker via random inbreeding in a finite population without pedigree records. We show how to estimate coancestry for a chromosomal position between individuals by using multipoint Bayesian estimation. Subsequently, we describe the FPL method for detecting linkage via interval mapping method using a nonparametric test. We show that the FPL method does work via simulated data. For a random sample from a finite population, the FPL method is more powerful than a standard pedigree-based linkage mapping method with using genotypes of all parents of the sample. In addition, the FPL method was demonstrated by actual microsatellite genotype data of 750 Japanese individuals that are unrelated according to pedigree records to map a known Psoriasis susceptible locus. For samples without pedigree records, it was suggested that the FPL method require limited number of individuals, therefore would be better than other methods using thousands of individuals.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".