↓ Skip to main content

Construction of relatedness matrices using genotyping-by-sequencing data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Genomics, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
11 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
116 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
206 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Construction of relatedness matrices using genotyping-by-sequencing data
Published in
BMC Genomics, December 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12864-015-2252-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ken G. Dodds, John C. McEwan, Rudiger Brauning, Rayna M. Anderson, Tracey C. van Stijn, Theodor Kristjánsson, Shannon M. Clarke

Abstract

Genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) is becoming an attractive alternative to array-based methods for genotyping individuals for a large number of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Costs can be lowered by reducing the mean sequencing depth, but this results in genotype calls of lower quality. A common analysis strategy is to filter SNPs to just those with sufficient depth, thereby greatly reducing the number of SNPs available. We investigate methods for estimating relatedness using GBS data, including results of low depth, using theoretical calculation, simulation and application to a real data set. We show that unbiased estimates of relatedness can be obtained by using only those SNPs with genotype calls in both individuals. The expected value of this estimator is independent of the SNP depth in each individual, under a model of genotype calling that includes the special case of the two alleles being read at random. In contrast, the estimator of self-relatedness does depend on the SNP depth, and we provide a modification to provide unbiased estimates of self-relatedness. We refer to these methods of estimation as kinship using GBS with depth adjustment (KGD). The estimators can be calculated using matrix methods, which allow efficient computation. Simulation results were consistent with the methods being unbiased, and suggest that the optimal sequencing depth is around 2-4 for relatedness between individuals and 5-10 for self-relatedness. Application to a real data set revealed that some SNP filtering may still be necessary, for the exclusion of SNPs which did not behave in a Mendelian fashion. A simple graphical method (a 'fin plot') is given to illustrate this issue and to guide filtering parameters. We provide a method which gives unbiased estimates of relatedness, based on SNPs assayed by GBS, which accounts for the depth (including zero depth) of the genotype calls. This allows GBS to be applied at read depths which can be chosen to optimise the information obtained. SNPs with excess heterozygosity, often due to (partial) polyploidy or other duplications can be filtered based on a simple graphical method.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 2 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 202 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 56 27%
Student > Ph. D. Student 49 24%
Student > Master 20 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 6%
Student > Bachelor 10 5%
Other 31 15%
Unknown 28 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 112 54%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 31 15%
Environmental Science 5 2%
Engineering 4 2%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 10 5%
Unknown 41 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 January 2023.
All research outputs
#1,978,590
of 24,039,735 outputs
Outputs from BMC Genomics
#490
of 10,884 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,121
of 396,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Genomics
#16
of 342 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,039,735 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,884 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 396,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 342 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.