The impact of SNP density on quantitative genetic analyses of body size traits in a wild population of Soay sheep
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the genetic architecture underpinning quantitative traits in wild populations is pivotal to understanding the processes behind trait evolution. The 'animal model' is a popular method for estimating quantitative genetic parameters such as heritability and genetic correlation and involves fitting an estimate of relatedness between individuals in the study population. Genotypes at genome-wide markers can be used to estimate relatedness; however, relatedness estimates vary with marker density, potentially affecting results. Increasing density of markers is also expected to increase the power to detect quantitative trait loci (QTL). In order to understand how the density of genetic markers affects the results of quantitative genetic analyses, we estimated heritability and performed genome-wide association studies (GWAS) on five body size traits in an unmanaged population of Soay sheep using two different SNP densities: a dataset of 37,037 genotyped SNPs and an imputed dataset of 417,373 SNPs. Heritability estimates did not differ between the two SNP densities, but the high-density imputed SNP dataset revealed four new SNP-trait associations that were not found with the lower density dataset, as well as confirming all previously-found QTL. We also demonstrated that fitting fixed and random effects in the same step as performing GWAS is a more powerful approach than pre-correcting for covariates in a separate model.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".