A Flexible and Accurate Genotype Imputation Method for the Next Generation of Genome-Wide Association Studies

Genotype imputation methods are now being widely used in the analysis of genome-wide association studies. Most imputation analyses to date have used the HapMap as a reference dataset, but new reference panels (such as controls genotyped on multiple SNP chips and densely typed samples from the 1,000 Genomes Project) will soon allow a broader range of SNPs to be imputed with higher accuracy, thereby increasing power. We describe a genotype imputation method (IMPUTE version 2) that is designed to address the challenges presented by these new datasets. The main innovation of our approach is a flexible modelling framework that increases accuracy and combines information across multiple reference panels while remaining computationally feasible. We find that IMPUTE v2 attains higher accuracy than other methods when the HapMap provides the sole reference panel, but that the size of the panel constrains the improvements that can be made. We also find that imputation accuracy can be greatly enhanced by expanding the reference panel to contain thousands of chromosomes and that IMPUTE v2 outperforms other methods in this setting at both rare and common SNPs, with overall error rates that are 15%–20% lower than those of the closest competing method. One particularly challenging aspect of next-generation association studies is to integrate information across multiple reference panels genotyped on different sets of SNPs; we show that our approach to this problem has practical advantages over other suggested solutions.     

Molecular prediction for atherogenic risks across different cell types of leukocytes

Background

We explored the imputation performance of the program IMPUTE in an admixed sample from Mexico City. The following issues were evaluated: (a) the impact of different reference panels (HapMap vs. 1000 Genomes) on imputation; (b) potential differences in imputation performance between single-step vs. two-step (phasing and imputation) approaches; (c) the effect of different INFO score thresholds on imputation performance and (d) imputation performance in common vs. rare markers.

Methods

The sample from Mexico City comprised 1,310 individuals genotyped with the Affymetrix 5.0 array. We randomly masked 5% of the markers directly genotyped on chromosome 12 (n?=?1,046) and compared the imputed genotypes with the microarray genotype calls. Imputation was carried out with the program IMPUTE. The concordance rates between the imputed and observed genotypes were used as a measure of imputation accuracy and the proportion of non-missing genotypes as a measure of imputation efficacy.

Results

The single-step imputation approach produced slightly higher concordance rates than the two-step strategy (99.1% vs. 98.4% when using the HapMap phase II combined panel), but at the expense of a lower proportion of non-missing genotypes (85.5% vs. 90.1%). The 1,000 Genomes reference sample produced similar concordance rates to the HapMap phase II panel (98.4% for both datasets, using the two-step strategy). However, the 1000 Genomes reference sample increased substantially the proportion of non-missing genotypes (94.7% vs. 90.1%). Rare variants (<1%) had lower imputation accuracy and efficacy than common markers.

Conclusions

The program IMPUTE had an excellent imputation performance for common alleles in an admixed sample from Mexico City, which has primarily Native American (62%) and European (33%) contributions. Genotype concordances were higher than 98.4% using all the imputation strategies, in spite of the fact that no Native American samples are present in the HapMap and 1000 Genomes reference panels. The best balance of imputation accuracy and efficiency was obtained with the 1,000 Genomes panel. Rare variants were not captured effectively by any of the available panels, emphasizing the need to be cautious in the interpretation of association results for imputed rare variants.     

Imputation of high-density genotypes in the Fleckvieh cattle population

Background

Currently, genome-wide evaluation of cattle populations is based on SNP-genotyping using ~ 54 000 SNP. Increasing the number of markers might improve genomic predictions and power of genome-wide association studies. Imputation of genotypes makes it possible to extrapolate genotypes from lower to higher density arrays based on a representative reference sample for which genotypes are obtained at higher density.

Methods

Genotypes using 639 214 SNP were available for 797 bulls of the Fleckvieh cattle breed. The data set was divided into a reference and a validation population. Genotypes for all SNP except those included in the BovineSNP50 Bead chip were masked and subsequently imputed for animals of the validation population. Imputation of genotypes was performed with Beagle, findhap.f90, MaCH and Minimac. The accuracy of the imputed genotypes was assessed for four different scenarios including 50, 100, 200 and 400 animals as reference population. The reference animals were selected to account for 78.03%, 89.21%, 97.47% and > 99% of the gene pool of the genotyped population, respectively.

Results

Imputation accuracy increased as the number of animals and relatives in the reference population increased. Population-based algorithms provided highly reliable imputation of genotypes, even for scenarios with 50 and 100 reference animals only. Using MaCH and Minimac, the correlation between true and imputed genotypes was > 0.975 with 100 reference animals only. Pre-phasing the genotypes of both the reference and validation populations not only provided highly accurate imputed genotypes but was also computationally efficient. Genome-wide analysis of imputation accuracy led to the identification of many misplaced SNP.

Conclusions

Genotyping key animals at high density and subsequent population-based genotype imputation yield high imputation accuracy. Pre-phasing the genotypes of the reference and validation populations is computationally efficient and results in high imputation accuracy, even when the reference population is small.     

Genotype Imputation Reference Panel Selection Using Maximal Phylogenetic Diversity

The recent dramatic cost reduction of next-generation sequencing technology enables investigators to assess most variants in the human genome to identify risk variants for complex diseases. However, sequencing large samples remains very expensive. For a study sample with existing genotype data, such as array data from genome-wide association studies, a cost-effective approach is to sequence a subset of the study sample and then to impute the rest of the study sample, using the sequenced subset as a reference panel. The use of such an internal reference panel identifies population-specific variants and avoids the problem of a substantial mismatch in ancestry background between the study population and the reference population. To efficiently select an internal panel, we introduce an idea of phylogenetic diversity from mathematical phylogenetics and comparative genomics. We propose the “most diverse reference panel”, defined as the subset with the maximal “phylogenetic diversity”, thereby incorporating individuals that span a diverse range of genotypes within the sample. Using data both from simulations and from the 1000 Genomes Project, we show that the most diverse reference panel can substantially improve the imputation accuracy compared to randomly selected reference panels, especially for the imputation of rare variants. The improvement in imputation accuracy holds across different marker densities, reference panel sizes, and lengths for the imputed segments. We thus propose a novel strategy for planning sequencing studies on samples with existing genotype data.     

Multi-generational imputation of single nucleotide polymorphism marker genotypes and accuracy of genomic selection

Availability of high-density single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotyping platforms provided unprecedented opportunities to enhance breeding programmes in livestock, poultry and plant species, and to better understand the genetic basis of complex traits. Using this genomic information, genomic breeding values (GEBVs), which are more accurate than conventional breeding values. The superiority of genomic selection is possible only when high-density SNP panels are used to track genes and QTLs affecting the trait. Unfortunately, even with the continuous decrease in genotyping costs, only a small fraction of the population has been genotyped with these high-density panels. It is often the case that a larger portion of the population is genotyped with low-density and low-cost SNP panels and then imputed to a higher density. Accuracy of SNP genotype imputation tends to be high when minimum requirements are met. Nevertheless, a certain rate of genotype imputation errors is unavoidable. Thus, it is reasonable to assume that the accuracy of GEBVs will be affected by imputation errors; especially, their cumulative effects over time. To evaluate the impact of multi-generational selection on the accuracy of SNP genotypes imputation and the reliability of resulting GEBVs, a simulation was carried out under varying updating of the reference population, distance between the reference and testing sets, and the approach used for the estimation of GEBVs. Using fixed reference populations, imputation accuracy decayed by about 0.5% per generation. In fact, after 25 generations, the accuracy was only 7% lower than the first generation. When the reference population was updated by either 1% or 5% of the top animals in the previous generations, decay of imputation accuracy was substantially reduced. These results indicate that low-density panels are useful, especially when the generational interval between reference and testing population is small. As the generational interval increases, the imputation accuracies decay, although not at an alarming rate. In absence of updating of the reference population, accuracy of GEBVs decays substantially in one or two generations at the rate of 20% to 25% per generation. When the reference population is updated by 1% or 5% every generation, the decay in accuracy was 8% to 11% after seven generations using true and imputed genotypes. These results indicate that imputed genotypes provide a viable alternative, even after several generations, as long the reference and training populations are appropriately updated to reflect the genetic change in the population.     

Evaluation of measures of correctness of genotype imputation in the context of genomic prediction: a review of livestock applications

In livestock, many studies have reported the results of imputation to 50k single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) genotypes for animals that are genotyped with low-density SNP panels. The objective of this paper is to review different measures of correctness of imputation, and to evaluate their utility depending on the purpose of the imputed genotypes. Across studies, imputation accuracy, computed as the correlation between true and imputed genotypes, and imputation error rates, that counts the number of incorrectly imputed alleles, are commonly used measures of imputation correctness. Based on the nature of both measures and results reported in the literature, imputation accuracy appears to be a more useful measure of the correctness of imputation than imputation error rates, because imputation accuracy does not depend on minor allele frequency (MAF), whereas imputation error rate depends on MAF. Therefore imputation accuracy can be better compared across loci with different MAF. Imputation accuracy depends on the ability of identifying the correct haplotype of a SNP, but many other factors have been identified as well, including the number of genotyped immediate ancestors, the number of animals with genotypes at the high-density panel, the SNP density on the low- and high-density panel, the MAF of the imputed SNP and whether imputed SNP are located at the end of a chromosome or not. Some of these factors directly contribute to the linkage disequilibrium between imputed SNP and SNP on the low-density panel. When imputation accuracy is assessed as a predictor for the accuracy of subsequent genomic prediction, we recommend that: (1) individual-specific imputation accuracies should be used that are computed after centring and scaling both true and imputed genotypes; and (2) imputation of gene dosage is preferred over imputation of the most likely genotype, as this increases accuracy and reduces bias of the imputed genotypes and the subsequent genomic predictions.     

Assessment of Genotype Imputation Performance Using 1000 Genomes in African American Studies

Genotype imputation, used in genome-wide association studies to expand coverage of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), has performed poorly in African Americans compared to less admixed populations. Overall, imputation has typically relied on HapMap reference haplotype panels from Africans (YRI), European Americans (CEU), and Asians (CHB/JPT). The 1000 Genomes project offers a wider range of reference populations, such as African Americans (ASW), but their imputation performance has had limited evaluation. Using 595 African Americans genotyped on Illumina’s HumanHap550v3 BeadChip, we compared imputation results from four software programs (IMPUTE2, BEAGLE, MaCH, and MaCH-Admix) and three reference panels consisting of different combinations of 1000 Genomes populations (February 2012 release): (1) 3 specifically selected populations (YRI, CEU, and ASW); (2) 8 populations of diverse African (AFR) or European (AFR) descent; and (3) all 14 available populations (ALL). Based on chromosome 22, we calculated three performance metrics: (1) concordance (percentage of masked genotyped SNPs with imputed and true genotype agreement); (2) imputation quality score (IQS; concordance adjusted for chance agreement, which is particularly informative for low minor allele frequency [MAF] SNPs); and (3) average r2hat (estimated correlation between the imputed and true genotypes, for all imputed SNPs). Across the reference panels, IMPUTE2 and MaCH had the highest concordance (91%–93%), but IMPUTE2 had the highest IQS (81%–83%) and average r2hat (0.68 using YRI+ASW+CEU, 0.62 using AFR+EUR, and 0.55 using ALL). Imputation quality for most programs was reduced by the addition of more distantly related reference populations, due entirely to the introduction of low frequency SNPs (MAF≤2%) that are monomorphic in the more closely related panels. While imputation was optimized by using IMPUTE2 with reference to the ALL panel (average r2hat = 0.86 for SNPs with MAF>2%), use of the ALL panel for African American studies requires careful interpretation of the population specificity and imputation quality of low frequency SNPs.     

Design of a low‐density SNP chip for the main Australian sheep breeds and its effect on imputation and genomic prediction accuracy

Genotyping sheep for genome‐wide SNPs at lower density and imputing to a higher density would enable cost‐effective implementation of genomic selection, provided imputation was accurate enough. Here, we describe the design of a low‐density (12k) SNP chip and evaluate the accuracy of imputation from the 12k SNP genotypes to 50k SNP genotypes in the major Australian sheep breeds. In addition, the impact of imperfect imputation on genomic predictions was evaluated by comparing the accuracy of genomic predictions for 15 novel meat traits including carcass and meat quality and omega fatty acid traits in sheep, from 12k SNP genotypes, imputed 50k SNP genotypes and real 50k SNP genotypes. The 12k chip design included 12 223 SNPs with a high minor allele frequency that were selected with intermarker spacing of 50–475 kb. SNPs for parentage and horned or polled tests also were represented. Chromosome ends were enriched with SNPs to reduce edge effects on imputation. The imputation performance of the 12k SNP chip was evaluated using 50k SNP genotypes of 4642 animals from six breeds in three different scenarios: (1) within breed, (2) single breed from multibreed reference and (3) multibreed from a single‐breed reference. The highest imputation accuracies were found with scenario 2, whereas scenario 3 was the worst, as expected. Using scenario 2, the average imputation accuracy in Border Leicester, Polled Dorset, Merino, White Suffolk and crosses was 0.95, 0.95, 0.92, 0.91 and 0.93 respectively. Imputation scenario 2 was used to impute 50k genotypes for 10 396 animals with novel meat trait phenotypes to compare genomic prediction accuracy using genomic best linear unbiased prediction (GBLUP) with real and imputed 50k genotypes. The weighted mean imputation accuracy achieved was 0.92. The average accuracy of genomic estimated breeding values (GEBVs) based on only 12k data was 0.08 across traits and breeds, but accuracies varied widely. The mean GBLUP accuracies with imputed 50k data more than doubled to 0.21. Accuracies of genomic prediction were very similar for imputed and real 50k genotypes. There was no apparent impact on accuracy of GEBVs as a result of using imputed rather than real 50k genotypes, provided imputation accuracy was >90%.     

A coalescent model for genotype imputation

The potential for imputed genotypes to enhance an analysis of genetic data depends largely on the accuracy of imputation, which in turn depends on properties of the reference panel of template haplotypes used to perform the imputation. To provide a basis for exploring how properties of the reference panel affect imputation accuracy theoretically rather than with computationally intensive imputation experiments, we introduce a coalescent model that considers imputation accuracy in terms of population-genetic parameters. Our model allows us to investigate sampling designs in the frequently occurring scenario in which imputation targets and templates are sampled from different populations. In particular, we derive expressions for expected imputation accuracy as a function of reference panel size and divergence time between the reference and target populations. We find that a modestly sized "internal" reference panel from the same population as a target haplotype yields, on average, greater imputation accuracy than a larger "external" panel from a different population, even if the divergence time between the two populations is small. The improvement in accuracy for the internal panel increases with increasing divergence time between the target and reference populations. Thus, in humans, our model predicts that imputation accuracy can be improved by generating small population-specific custom reference panels to augment existing collections such as those of the HapMap or 1000 Genomes Projects. Our approach can be extended to understand additional factors that affect imputation accuracy in complex population-genetic settings, and the results can ultimately facilitate improvements in imputation study designs.     

ProbABEL package for genome-wide association analysis of imputed data

Background  

Over the last few years, genome-wide association (GWA) studies became a tool of choice for the identification of loci associated with complex traits. Currently, imputed single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) data are frequently used in GWA analyzes. Correct analysis of imputed data calls for the implementation of specific methods which take genotype imputation uncertainty into account.     

When Does Choice of Accuracy Measure Alter Imputation Accuracy Assessments?

Imputation, the process of inferring genotypes for untyped variants, is used to identify and refine genetic association findings. Inaccuracies in imputed data can distort the observed association between variants and a disease. Many statistics are used to assess accuracy; some compare imputed to genotyped data and others are calculated without reference to true genotypes. Prior work has shown that the Imputation Quality Score (IQS), which is based on Cohen’s kappa statistic and compares imputed genotype probabilities to true genotypes, appropriately adjusts for chance agreement; however, it is not commonly used. To identify differences in accuracy assessment, we compared IQS with concordance rate, squared correlation, and accuracy measures built into imputation programs. Genotypes from the 1000 Genomes reference populations (AFR N = 246 and EUR N = 379) were masked to match the typed single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) coverage of several SNP arrays and were imputed with BEAGLE 3.3.2 and IMPUTE2 in regions associated with smoking behaviors. Additional masking and imputation was conducted for sequenced subjects from the Collaborative Genetic Study of Nicotine Dependence and the Genetic Study of Nicotine Dependence in African Americans (N = 1,481 African Americans and N = 1,480 European Americans). Our results offer further evidence that concordance rate inflates accuracy estimates, particularly for rare and low frequency variants. For common variants, squared correlation, BEAGLE R², IMPUTE2 INFO, and IQS produce similar assessments of imputation accuracy. However, for rare and low frequency variants, compared to IQS, the other statistics tend to be more liberal in their assessment of accuracy. IQS is important to consider when evaluating imputation accuracy, particularly for rare and low frequency variants.     

The Relationship between Imputation Error and Statistical Power in Genetic Association Studies in Diverse Populations

Genotype-imputation methods provide an essential technique for high-resolution genome-wide association (GWA) studies with millions of single-nucleotide polymorphisms. For optimal design and interpretation of imputation-based GWA studies, it is important to understand the connection between imputation error and power to detect associations at imputed markers. Here, using a 2 × 3 chi-square test, we describe a relationship between genotype-imputation error rates and the sample-size inflation required for achieving statistical power at an imputed marker equal to that obtained if genotypes at the marker were known with certainty. Surprisingly, typical imputation error rates (∼2%–6%) lead to a large increase in the required sample size (∼10%–60%), and in some African populations whose genotypes are particularly difficult to impute, the required sample-size increase is as high as ∼30%–150%. In most populations, each 1% increase in imputation error leads to an increase of ∼5%–13% in the sample size required for maintaining power. These results imply that in GWA sample-size calculations investigators will need to account for a potentially considerable loss of power from even low levels of imputation error and that development of additional genomic resources that decrease imputation error will translate into substantial reduction in the sample sizes needed for imputation-based detection of the variants that underlie complex human diseases.     

Accuracy of genotype imputation in sheep breeds

Although genomic selection offers the prospect of improving the rate of genetic gain in meat, wool and dairy sheep breeding programs, the key constraint is likely to be the cost of genotyping. Potentially, this constraint can be overcome by genotyping selection candidates for a low density (low cost) panel of SNPs with sparse genotype coverage, imputing a much higher density of SNP genotypes using a densely genotyped reference population. These imputed genotypes would then be used with a prediction equation to produce genomic estimated breeding values. In the future, it may also be desirable to impute very dense marker genotypes or even whole genome re‐sequence data from moderate density SNP panels. Such a strategy could lead to an accurate prediction of genomic estimated breeding values across breeds, for example. We used genotypes from 48 640 (50K) SNPs genotyped in four sheep breeds to investigate both the accuracy of imputation of the 50K SNPs from low density SNP panels, as well as prospects for imputing very dense or whole genome re‐sequence data from the 50K SNPs (by leaving out a small number of the 50K SNPs at random). Accuracy of imputation was low if the sparse panel had less than 5000 (5K) markers. Across breeds, it was clear that the accuracy of imputing from sparse marker panels to 50K was higher if the genetic diversity within a breed was lower, such that relationships among animals in that breed were higher. The accuracy of imputation from sparse genotypes to 50K genotypes was higher when the imputation was performed within breed rather than when pooling all the data, despite the fact that the pooled reference set was much larger. For Border Leicesters, Poll Dorsets and White Suffolks, 5K sparse genotypes were sufficient to impute 50K with 80% accuracy. For Merinos, the accuracy of imputing 50K from 5K was lower at 71%, despite a large number of animals with full genotypes (2215) being used as a reference. For all breeds, the relationship of individuals to the reference explained up to 64% of the variation in accuracy of imputation, demonstrating that accuracy of imputation can be increased if sires and other ancestors of the individuals to be imputed are included in the reference population. The accuracy of imputation could also be increased if pedigree information was available and was used in tracking inheritance of large chromosome segments within families. In our study, we only considered methods of imputation based on population‐wide linkage disequilibrium (largely because the pedigree for some of the populations was incomplete). Finally, in the scenarios designed to mimic imputation of high density or whole genome re‐sequence data from the 50K panel, the accuracy of imputation was much higher (86–96%). This is promising, suggesting that in silico genome re‐sequencing is possible in sheep if a suitable pool of key ancestors is sequenced for each breed.     

Assessing Accuracy of Genotype Imputation in American Indians

Background

Genotype imputation is commonly used in genetic association studies to test untyped variants using information on linkage disequilibrium (LD) with typed markers. Imputing genotypes requires a suitable reference population in which the LD pattern is known, most often one selected from HapMap. However, some populations, such as American Indians, are not represented in HapMap. In the present study, we assessed accuracy of imputation using HapMap reference populations in a genome-wide association study in Pima Indians.

Results

Data from six randomly selected chromosomes were used. Genotypes in the study population were masked (either 1% or 20% of SNPs available for a given chromosome). The masked genotypes were then imputed using the software Markov Chain Haplotyping Algorithm. Using four HapMap reference populations, average genotype error rates ranged from 7.86% for Mexican Americans to 22.30% for Yoruba. In contrast, use of the original Pima Indian data as a reference resulted in an average error rate of 1.73%.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that the use of HapMap reference populations results in substantial inaccuracy in the imputation of genotypes in American Indians. A possible solution would be to densely genotype or sequence a reference American Indian population.     

Imputation of genotypes in Danish purebred and two-way crossbred pigs using low-density panels

Background

Genotype imputation is commonly used as an initial step in genomic selection since the accuracy of genomic selection does not decline if accurately imputed genotypes are used instead of actual genotypes but for a lower cost. Performance of imputation has rarely been investigated in crossbred animals and, in particular, in pigs. The extent and pattern of linkage disequilibrium differ in crossbred versus purebred animals, which may impact the performance of imputation. In this study, first we compared different scenarios of imputation from 5 K to 8 K single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genotyped Danish Landrace and Yorkshire and crossbred Landrace-Yorkshire datasets and, second, we compared imputation from 8 K to 60 K SNPs in genotyped purebred and simulated crossbred datasets. All imputations were done using software Beagle version 3.3.2. Then, we investigated the reasons that could explain the differences observed.

Results

Genotype imputation performs as well in crossbred animals as in purebred animals when both parental breeds are included in the reference population. When the size of the reference population is very large, it is not necessary to use a reference population that combines the two breeds to impute the genotypes of purebred animals because a within-breed reference population can provide a very high level of imputation accuracy (correct rate ≥ 0.99, correlation ≥ 0.95). However, to ensure that similar imputation accuracies are obtained for crossbred animals, a reference population that combines both parental purebred animals is required. Imputation accuracies are higher when a larger proportion of haplotypes are shared between the reference population and the validation (imputed) populations.

Conclusions

The results from both real data and pedigree-based simulated data demonstrate that genotype imputation from low-density panels to medium-density panels is highly accurate in both purebred and crossbred pigs. In crossbred pigs, combining the parental purebred animals in the reference population is necessary to obtain high imputation accuracy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12711-015-0134-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.     

Genotype imputation in the domestic dog

Application of imputation methods to accurately predict a dense array of SNP genotypes in the dog could provide an important supplement to current analyses of array-based genotyping data. Here, we developed a reference panel of 4,885,283 SNPs in 83 dogs across 15 breeds using whole genome sequencing. We used this panel to predict the genotypes of 268 dogs across three breeds with 84,193 SNP array-derived genotypes as inputs. We then (1) performed breed clustering of the actual and imputed data; (2) evaluated several reference panel breed combinations to determine an optimal reference panel composition; and (3) compared the accuracy of two commonly used software algorithms (Beagle and IMPUTE2). Breed clustering was well preserved in the imputation process across eigenvalues representing 75 % of the variation in the imputed data. Using Beagle with a target panel from a single breed, genotype concordance was highest using a multi-breed reference panel (92.4 %) compared to a breed-specific reference panel (87.0 %) or a reference panel containing no breeds overlapping with the target panel (74.9 %). This finding was confirmed using target panels derived from two other breeds. Additionally, using the multi-breed reference panel, genotype concordance was slightly higher with IMPUTE2 (94.1 %) compared to Beagle; Pearson correlation coefficients were slightly higher for both software packages (0.946 for Beagle, 0.961 for IMPUTE2). Our findings demonstrate that genotype imputation from SNP array-derived data to whole genome-level genotypes is both feasible and accurate in the dog with appropriate breed overlap between the target and reference panels.     

Power to detect risk alleles using genome-wide tag SNP panels

Advances in high-throughput genotyping and the International HapMap Project have enabled association studies at the whole-genome level. We have constructed whole-genome genotyping panels of over 550,000 (HumanHap550) and 650,000 (HumanHap650Y) SNP loci by choosing tag SNPs from all populations genotyped by the International HapMap Project. These panels also contain additional SNP content in regions that have historically been overrepresented in diseases, such as nonsynonymous sites, the MHC region, copy number variant regions and mitochondrial DNA. We estimate that the tag SNP loci in these panels cover the majority of all common variation in the genome as measured by coverage of both all common HapMap SNPs and an independent set of SNPs derived from complete resequencing of genes obtained from SeattleSNPs. We also estimate that, given a sample size of 1,000 cases and 1,000 controls, these panels have the power to detect single disease loci of moderate risk (λ ~ 1.8–2.0). Relative risks as low as λ ~ 1.1–1.3 can be detected using 10,000 cases and 10,000 controls depending on the sample population and disease model. If multiple loci are involved, the power increases significantly to detect at least one locus such that relative risks 20%–35% lower can be detected with 80% power if between two and four independent loci are involved. Although our SNP selection was based on HapMap data, which is a subset of all common SNPs, these panels effectively capture the majority of all common variation and provide high power to detect risk alleles that are not represented in the HapMap data.     

Accuracy of imputation to whole-genome sequence data in Holstein Friesian cattle

Background

The use of whole-genome sequence data can lead to higher accuracy in genome-wide association studies and genomic predictions. However, to benefit from whole-genome sequence data, a large dataset of sequenced individuals is needed. Imputation from SNP panels, such as the Illumina BovineSNP50 BeadChip and Illumina BovineHD BeadChip, to whole-genome sequence data is an attractive and less expensive approach to obtain whole-genome sequence genotypes for a large number of individuals than sequencing all individuals. Our objective was to investigate accuracy of imputation from lower density SNP panels to whole-genome sequence data in a typical dataset for cattle.

Methods

Whole-genome sequence data of chromosome 1 (1737 471 SNPs) for 114 Holstein Friesian bulls were used. Beagle software was used for imputation from the BovineSNP50 (3132 SNPs) and BovineHD (40 492 SNPs) beadchips. Accuracy was calculated as the correlation between observed and imputed genotypes and assessed by five-fold cross-validation. Three scenarios S40, S60 and S80 with respectively 40%, 60%, and 80% of the individuals as reference individuals were investigated.

Results

Mean accuracies of imputation per SNP from the BovineHD panel to sequence data and from the BovineSNP50 panel to sequence data for scenarios S40 and S80 ranged from 0.77 to 0.83 and from 0.37 to 0.46, respectively. Stepwise imputation from the BovineSNP50 to BovineHD panel and then to sequence data for scenario S40 improved accuracy per SNP to 0.65 but it varied considerably between SNPs.

Conclusions

Accuracy of imputation to whole-genome sequence data was generally high for imputation from the BovineHD beadchip, but was low from the BovineSNP50 beadchip. Stepwise imputation from the BovineSNP50 to the BovineHD beadchip and then to sequence data substantially improved accuracy of imputation. SNPs with a low minor allele frequency were more difficult to impute correctly and the reliability of imputation varied more. Linkage disequilibrium between an imputed SNP and the SNP on the lower density panel, minor allele frequency of the imputed SNP and size of the reference group affected imputation reliability.     

Performance of Genotype Imputation for Low Frequency and Rare Variants from the 1000 Genomes

Genotype imputation is now routinely applied in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) and meta-analyses. However, most of the imputations have been run using HapMap samples as reference, imputation of low frequency and rare variants (minor allele frequency (MAF) < 5%) are not systemically assessed. With the emergence of next-generation sequencing, large reference panels (such as the 1000 Genomes panel) are available to facilitate imputation of these variants. Therefore, in order to estimate the performance of low frequency and rare variants imputation, we imputed 153 individuals, each of whom had 3 different genotype array data including 317k, 610k and 1 million SNPs, to three different reference panels: the 1000 Genomes pilot March 2010 release (1KGpilot), the 1000 Genomes interim August 2010 release (1KGinterim), and the 1000 Genomes phase1 November 2010 and May 2011 release (1KGphase1) by using IMPUTE version 2. The differences between these three releases of the 1000 Genomes data are the sample size, ancestry diversity, number of variants and their frequency spectrum. We found that both reference panel and GWAS chip density affect the imputation of low frequency and rare variants. 1KGphase1 outperformed the other 2 panels, at higher concordance rate, higher proportion of well-imputed variants (info>0.4) and higher mean info score in each MAF bin. Similarly, 1M chip array outperformed 610K and 317K. However for very rare variants (MAF≤0.3%), only 0–1% of the variants were well imputed. We conclude that the imputation of low frequency and rare variants improves with larger reference panels and higher density of genome-wide genotyping arrays. Yet, despite a large reference panel size and dense genotyping density, very rare variants remain difficult to impute.     

Why are rare variants hard to impute? Coalescent models reveal theoretical limits in existing algorithms

Genotype imputation is an indispensable step in human genetic studies. Large reference panels with deeply sequenced genomes now allow interrogating variants with minor allele frequency < 1% without sequencing. Although it is critical to consider limits of this approach, imputation methods for rare variants have only done so empirically; the theoretical basis of their imputation accuracy has not been explored. To provide theoretical consideration of imputation accuracy under the current imputation framework, we develop a coalescent model of imputing rare variants, leveraging the joint genealogy of the sample to be imputed and reference individuals. We show that broadly used imputation algorithms include model misspecifications about this joint genealogy that limit the ability to correctly impute rare variants. We develop closed-form solutions for the probability distribution of this joint genealogy and quantify the inevitable error rate resulting from the model misspecification across a range of allele frequencies and reference sample sizes. We show that the probability of a falsely imputed minor allele decreases with reference sample size, but the proportion of falsely imputed minor alleles mostly depends on the allele count in the reference sample. We summarize the impact of this error on genotype imputation on association tests by calculating the r² between imputed and true genotype and show that even when modeling other sources of error, the impact of the model misspecification has a significant impact on the r² of rare variants. To evaluate these predictions in practice, we compare the imputation of the same dataset across imputation panels of different sizes. Although this empirical imputation accuracy is substantially lower than our theoretical prediction, modeling misspecification seems to further decrease imputation accuracy for variants with low allele counts in the reference. These results provide a framework for developing new imputation algorithms and for interpreting rare variant association analyses.