MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922767806 · doi:10.1186/s12711-018-0443-5

Accuracy of imputation to whole-genome sequence in sheep

2019· article· en· W2922767806 on OpenAlexaff
Sunduimijid Bolormaa, Amanda J. Chamberlain, Majid Khansefid, Paul Stothard, Andrew Swan, Brett Mason, Claire Prowse-Wilkins, Naomi Duijvesteijn, Nasir Moghaddar, J. H. J. van der Werf, Hans D. Daetwyler, Iona M. MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetics Selection Evolution · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestock
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersUniversity of New EnglandAustralian Wool Innovation
KeywordsImputation (statistics)BiologySingle-nucleotide polymorphismWhole genome sequencingGenetics1000 Genomes ProjectStatisticSNPGenome-wide association studyPopulationBreedGenetic associationMinor allele frequencyStatisticsGenomeGenotypeMissing dataGeneDemographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of whole-genome sequence (WGS) data for genomic prediction and association studies is highly desirable because the causal mutations should be present in the data. The sequencing of 935 sheep from a range of breeds provides the opportunity to impute sheep genotyped with single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) arrays to WGS. This study evaluated the accuracy of imputation from SNP genotypes to WGS using this reference population of 935 sequenced sheep. The accuracy of imputation from the Ovine Infinium ® HD BeadChip SNP (~ 500 k) to WGS was assessed for three target breeds: Merino, Poll Dorset and F1 Border Leicester × Merino. Imputation accuracy was highest for the Poll Dorset breed, although there were more Merino individuals in the sequenced reference population than Poll Dorset individuals. In addition, empirical imputation accuracies were higher (by up to 1.7%) when using larger multi-breed reference populations compared to using a smaller single-breed reference population. The mean accuracy of imputation across target breeds using the Minimac3 or the FImpute software was 0.94. The empirical imputation accuracy varied considerably across the genome; six chromosomes carried regions of one or more Mb with a mean imputation accuracy of < 0.7. Imputation accuracy in five variant annotation classes ranged from 0.87 (missense) up to 0.94 (intronic variants), where lower accuracy corresponded to higher proportions of rare alleles. The imputation quality statistic reported from Minimac3 ( R 2 ) had a clear positive relationship with the empirical imputation accuracy. Therefore, by first discarding imputed variants with an R 2 below 0.4, the mean empirical accuracy across target breeds increased to 0.97. Although accuracy of genomic prediction was less affected by filtering on R 2 in a multi-breed population of sheep with imputed WGS, the genomic heritability clearly tended to be lower when using variants with an R 2 ≤ 0.4. The mean imputation accuracy was high for all target breeds and was increased by combining smaller breed sets into a multi-breed reference. We found that the Minimac3 software imputation quality statistic ( R 2 ) was a useful indicator of empirical imputation accuracy, enabling removal of very poorly imputed variants before downstream analyses.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.063
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.180

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.063
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations74
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenetics Selection EvolutionSame topicGenetic and phenotypic traits in livestockFrench-language works237,207