MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2978329949 · doi:10.1101/795492

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

2019· preprint· en· W2978329949 on OpenAlexafffund
Morteza M. Saber, B. Jesse Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2019
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersGénome QuébecGenome Canada
KeywordsGenome-wide association studyBiologyGeneticsGenetic associationPopulationComputational biologyGenomeSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from 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.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.259 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
DomainMethods
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)→Same topicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology→French-language works237,207→