Estimation of genotype error rate using samples with pedigree information--an application on the GeneChip Mapping 10K array

Currently, most analytical methods assume all observed genotypes are correct; however, it is clear that errors may reduce statistical power or bias inference in genetic studies. We propose procedures for estimating error rate in genetic analysis and apply them to study the GeneChip Mapping 10K array, which is a technology that has recently become available and allows researchers to survey over 10,000 SNPs in a single assay. We employed a strategy to estimate the genotype error rate in pedigree data. First, the "dose-response" reference curve between error rate and the observable error number were derived by simulation, conditional on given pedigree structures and genotypes. Second, the error rate was estimated by calibrating the number of observed errors in real data to the reference curve. We evaluated the performance of this method by simulation study and applied it to a data set of 30 pedigrees genotyped using the GeneChip Mapping 10K array. This method performed favorably in all scenarios we surveyed. The dose-response reference curve was monotone and almost linear with a large slope. The method was able to estimate accurately the error rate under various pedigree structures and error models and under heterogeneous error rates. Using this method, we found that the average genotyping error rate of the GeneChip Mapping 10K array was about 0.1%. Our method provides a quick and unbiased solution to address the genotype error rate in pedigree data. It behaves well in a wide range of settings and can be easily applied in other genetic projects. The robust estimation of genotyping error rate allows us to estimate power and sample size and conduct unbiased genetic tests. The GeneChip Mapping 10K array has a low overall error rate, which is consistent with the results obtained from alternative genotyping assays.     

Maximum-likelihood estimation of allelic dropout and false allele error rates from microsatellite genotypes in the absence of reference data

The importance of quantifying and accounting for stochastic genotyping errors when analyzing microsatellite data is increasingly being recognized. This awareness is motivating the development of data analysis methods that not only take errors into consideration but also recognize the difference between two distinct classes of error, allelic dropout and false alleles. Currently methods to estimate rates of allelic dropout and false alleles depend upon the availability of error-free reference genotypes or reliable pedigree data, which are often not available. We have developed a maximum-likelihood-based method for estimating these error rates from a single replication of a sample of genotypes. Simulations show it to be both accurate and robust to modest violations of its underlying assumptions. We have applied the method to estimating error rates in two microsatellite data sets. It is implemented in a computer program, Pedant, which estimates allelic dropout and false allele error rates with 95% confidence regions from microsatellite genotype data and performs power analysis. Pedant is freely available at http://www.stats.gla.ac.uk/ approximately paulj/pedant.html.     

Consequences of genotyping errors for estimation of clonality: a case study on <Emphasis Type="Italic">Populus euphratica</Emphasis> Oliv. (Salicaceae)

A study including eight microsatellite loci for 1,014 trees from seven mapped stands of the partially clonal Populus euphratica was used to demonstrate how genotyping errors influence estimates of clonality. With a threshold of 0 (identical multilocus genotypes constitute one clone) we identified 602 genotypes. A threshold of 1 (compensating for an error in one allele) lowered this number to 563. Genotyping errors can seemingly merge (type 1 error), split really existing clones (type 2), or convert a unique genotype into another unique genotype (type 3). We used context information (sex and spatial position) to estimate the type 1 error. For thresholds of 0 and 1 the estimate was below 0.021, suggesting a high resolution for the marker system. The rate of genotyping errors was estimated by repeated genotyping for a cohort of 41 trees drawn at random (0.158), and a second cohort of 40 trees deviating in one allele from another tree (0.368). For the latter cohort, most of these deviations turned out to be errors, but 8 out of 602 obtained multilocus genotypes may represent somatic mutations, corresponding to a mutation rate of 0.013. A simulation of genotyping errors for populations with varying clonality and evenness showed the number of genotypes always to be overestimated for a system with high resolution, and this mistake increases with increasing clonality and evenness. Allowing a threshold of 1 compensates for most genotyping errors and leads to much more precise estimates of clonality compared with a threshold of 0. This lowers the resolution of the marker system, but comparison with context information can help to check if the resolution is sufficient to apply a higher threshold. We recommend simulation procedures to investigate the behavior of a marker system for different thresholds and error rates to obtain the best estimate of clonality.     

Error detection for genetic data, using likelihood methods.

As genetic maps become denser, the effect of laboratory typing errors becomes more serious. We review a general method for detecting errors in pedigree genotyping data that is a variant of the likelihood-ratio test statistic. It pinpoints individuals and loci with relatively unlikely genotypes. Power and significance studies using Monte Carlo methods are shown by using simulated data with pedigree structures similar to the CEPH pedigrees and a larger experimental pedigree used in the study of idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). The studies show the index detects errors for small values of theta with high power and an acceptable false positive rate. The method was also used to check for errors in DCM laboratory pedigree data and to estimate the error rate in CEPH-chromosome 6 data. The errors flagged by our method in the DCM pedigree were confirmed by the laboratory. The results are consistent with estimated false-positive and false-negative rates obtained using simulation.     

megasat: automated inference of microsatellite genotypes from sequence data

megasat is software that enables genotyping of microsatellite loci using next‐generation sequencing data. Microsatellites are amplified in large multiplexes, and then sequenced in pooled amplicons. megasat reads sequence files and automatically scores microsatellite genotypes. It uses fuzzy matches to allow for sequencing errors and applies decision rules to account for amplification artefacts, including nontarget amplification products, replication slippage during PCR (amplification stutter) and differential amplification of alleles. An important feature of megasat is the generation of histograms of the length–frequency distributions of amplification products for each locus and each individual. These histograms, analogous to electropherograms traditionally used to score microsatellite genotypes, enable rapid evaluation and editing of automatically scored genotypes. megasat is written in Perl, runs on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux systems, and includes a simple graphical user interface. We demonstrate megasat using data from guppy, Poecilia reticulata. We genotype 1024 guppies at 43 microsatellites per run on an Illumina MiSeq sequencer. We evaluated the accuracy of automatically called genotypes using two methods, based on pedigree and repeat genotyping data, and obtained estimates of mean genotyping error rates of 0.021 and 0.012. In both estimates, three loci accounted for a disproportionate fraction of genotyping errors; conversely, 26 loci were scored with 0–1 detected error (error rate ≤0.007). Our results show that with appropriate selection of loci, automated genotyping of microsatellite loci can be achieved with very high throughput, low genotyping error and very low genotyping costs.     

TECHNICAL ADVANCES: Effects of genotyping protocols on success and errors in identifying individual river otters (Lontra canadensis) from their faeces

In noninvasive genetic sampling, when genotyping error rates are high and recapture rates are low, misidentification of individuals can lead to overestimation of population size. Thus, estimating genotyping errors is imperative. Nonetheless, conducting multiple polymerase chain reactions (PCRs) at multiple loci is time-consuming and costly. To address the controversy regarding the minimum number of PCRs required for obtaining a consensus genotype, we compared consumer-style the performance of two genotyping protocols (multiple-tubes and 'comparative method') in respect to genotyping success and error rates. Our results from 48 faecal samples of river otters (Lontra canadensis) collected in Wyoming in 2003, and from blood samples of five captive river otters amplified with four different primers, suggest that use of the comparative genotyping protocol can minimize the number of PCRs per locus. For all but five samples at one locus, the same consensus genotypes were reached with fewer PCRs and with reduced error rates with this protocol compared to the multiple-tubes method. This finding is reassuring because genotyping errors can occur at relatively high rates even in tissues such as blood and hair. In addition, we found that loci that amplify readily and yield consensus genotypes, may still exhibit high error rates (7-32%) and that amplification with different primers resulted in different types and rates of error. Thus, assigning a genotype based on a single PCR for several loci could result in misidentification of individuals. We recommend that programs designed to statistically assign consensus genotypes should be modified to allow the different treatment of heterozygotes and homozygotes intrinsic to the comparative method.     

Estimation of genotyping error rate from repeat genotyping,unintentional recaptures and known parent–offspring comparisons in 16 microsatellite loci for brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus)

Genotyping errors are present in almost all genetic data and can affect biological conclusions of a study, particularly for studies based on individual identification and parentage. Many statistical approaches can incorporate genotyping errors, but usually need accurate estimates of error rates. Here, we used a new microsatellite data set developed for brown rockfish (Sebastes auriculatus) to estimate genotyping error using three approaches: (i) repeat genotyping 5% of samples, (ii) comparing unintentionally recaptured individuals and (iii) Mendelian inheritance error checking for known parent–offspring pairs. In each data set, we quantified genotyping error rate per allele due to allele drop‐out and false alleles. Genotyping error rate per locus revealed an average overall genotyping error rate by direct count of 0.3%, 1.5% and 1.7% (0.002, 0.007 and 0.008 per allele error rate) from replicate genotypes, known parent–offspring pairs and unintentionally recaptured individuals, respectively. By direct‐count error estimates, the recapture and known parent–offspring data sets revealed an error rate four times greater than estimated using repeat genotypes. There was no evidence of correlation between error rates and locus variability for all three data sets, and errors appeared to occur randomly over loci in the repeat genotypes, but not in recaptures and parent–offspring comparisons. Furthermore, there was no correlation in locus‐specific error rates between any two of the three data sets. Our data suggest that repeat genotyping may underestimate true error rates and may not estimate locus‐specific error rates accurately. We therefore suggest using methods for error estimation that correspond to the overall aim of the study (e.g. known parent–offspring comparisons in parentage studies).     

Inferring haplotypes from genotypes on a pedigree with mutations, genotyping errors and missing alleles

Inferring the haplotypes of the members of a pedigree from their genotypes has been extensively studied. However, most studies do not consider genotyping errors and de novo mutations. In this paper, we study how to infer haplotypes from genotype data that may contain genotyping errors, de novo mutations, and missing alleles. We assume that there are no recombinants in the genotype data, which is usually true for tightly linked markers. We introduce a combinatorial optimization problem, called haplotype configuration with mutations and errors (HCME), which calls for haplotype configurations consistent with the given genotypes that incur no recombinants and require the minimum number of mutations and errors. HCME is NP-hard. To solve the problem, we propose a heuristic algorithm, the core of which is an integer linear program (ILP) using the system of linear equations over Galois field GF(2). Our algorithm can detect and locate genotyping errors that cannot be detected by simply checking the Mendelian law of inheritance. The algorithm also offers error correction in genotypes/haplotypes rather than just detecting inconsistencies and deleting the involved loci. Our experimental results show that the algorithm can infer haplotypes with a very high accuracy and recover 65%-94% of genotyping errors depending on the pedigree topology.     

Detection rates for genotyping errors in SNPs using the trio design

One well-known approach for the analysis of transmission-disequilibrium is the investigation of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in trios consisting of an affected child and its parents. Results may be biased by erroneously given genotypes. Various reasons, among them sample swap or wrong pedigree structure, represent a possible source for biased results. As these can be partly ruled out by good study conditions together with checks for correct pedigree structure by a series of independent markers, the remaining main cause for errors is genotyping errors. Some of the errors can be detected by Mendelian checks whilst others are compatible with the pedigree structure. The extent of genotyping errors can be estimated by investigating the rate of detected genotyping errors by Mendelian checks. In many studies only one SNP of a specific genomic region is investigated by TDT which leaves Mendelian checks as the only tool to control genotyping errors. From the rate of detected errors the true error rate can be estimated. Gordon et al. [Hum Hered 1999;49:65-70] considered the case of genotyping errors that occur randomly and independently with some fixed probability for the wrong ascertainment of an allele. In practice, instead of single alleles, SNP genotypes are determined. Therefore, we study the proportion of detected errors (detection rate) based on genotypes. In contrast to Gordon et al., who reported detection rates between 25 and 30%, we obtain higher detection rates ranging from 39 up to 61% considering likely error structures in the data. We conclude that detection rates are probably substantially higher than those reported by Gordon et al.     

Genotyping error detection through tightly linked markers

The identification of genotyping errors is an important issue in mapping complex disease genes. Although it is common practice to genotype multiple markers in a candidate region in genetic studies, the potential benefit of jointly analyzing multiple markers to detect genotyping errors has not been investigated. In this article, we discuss genotyping error detections for a set of tightly linked markers in nuclear families, and the objective is to identify families likely to have genotyping errors at one or more markers. We make use of the fact that recombination is a very unlikely event among these markers. We first show that, with family trios, no extra information can be gained by jointly analyzing markers if no phase information is available, and error detection rates are usually low if Mendelian consistency is used as the only standard for checking errors. However, for nuclear families with more than one child, error detection rates can be greatly increased with the consideration of more markers. Error detection rates also increase with the number of children in each family. Because families displaying Mendelian consistency may still have genotyping errors, we calculate the probability that a family displaying Mendelian consistency has correct genotypes. These probabilities can help identify families that, although showing Mendelian consistency, may have genotyping errors. In addition, we examine the benefit of available haplotype frequencies in the general population on genotyping error detections. We show that both error detection rates and the probability that an observed family displaying Mendelian consistency has correct genotypes can be greatly increased when such additional information is available.     

Incorporating Genotyping Error Into Non-Invasive DNA-Based Mark—Recapture Population Estimates

ABSTRACT Use of non-invasive sources of DNA, such as hair or scat, to obtain a genetic mark for population estimates is becoming commonplace. Unfortunately, with such marks, potentials for genotyping errors and for the shadow effect have resulted in use of many loci and amplification of each specimen many times at each locus, drastically increasing time and cost of obtaining a population estimate. We proposed a method, the Genotyping Uncertainty Added Variance Adjustment (GUAVA), which statistically adjusts for genotyping errors and the shadow effect, thereby allowing use of fewer loci and one amplification of each specimen per locus. Using allele frequencies and estimates of genotyping error rates, we determined, for each pair of specimens, the probability that the pair was obtained from the same individual, whether or not their observed genotypes match. Using these probabilities, we reconstructed possible capture history matrices and used this distribution to obtain a population estimate. With simulated data, we consistently found our estimates had lower bias and smaller variance than estimates based on single amplifications in which genotyping error was ignored and that were comparable to estimates based on data free of genotyping errors. We also demonstrated the method on a fecal DNA data set from a population of red wolves (Canis rufus). The GUAVA estimate based on only one amplification genotypes compares favorably to the estimate based on consensus genotypes. A program to conduct the analysis is available from the first author for UNIX or Windows platforms. Application of GUAVA may allow for increased accuracy in population estimates at reduced cost.     

Using DNA pools for genotyping trios

The genotyping of mother–father–child trios is a very useful tool in disease association studies, as trios eliminate population stratification effects and increase the accuracy of haplotype inference. Unfortunately, the use of trios for association studies may reduce power, since it requires the genotyping of three individuals where only four independent haplotypes are involved. We describe here a method for genotyping a trio using two DNA pools, thus reducing the cost of genotyping trios to that of genotyping two individuals. Furthermore, we present extensions to the method that exploit the linkage disequilibrium structure to compensate for missing data and genotyping errors. We evaluated our method on trios from CEPH pedigree 66 of the Coriell Institute. We demonstrate that the error rates in the genotype calls of the proposed protocol are comparable to those of standard genotyping techniques, although the cost is reduced considerably. The approach described is generic and it can be applied to any genotyping platform that achieves a reasonable precision of allele frequency estimates from pools of two individuals. Using this approach, future trio-based association studies may be able to increase the sample size by 50% for the same cost and thereby increase the power to detect associations.     

Detection and Integration of Genotyping Errors in Statistical Genetics

Detection of genotyping errors and integration of such errors in statistical analysis are relatively neglected topics, given their importance in gene mapping. A few inopportunely placed errors, if ignored, can tremendously affect evidence for linkage. The present study takes a fresh look at the calculation of pedigree likelihoods in the presence of genotyping error. To accommodate genotyping error, we present extensions to the Lander-Green-Kruglyak deterministic algorithm for small pedigrees and to the Markov-chain Monte Carlo stochastic algorithm for large pedigrees. These extensions can accommodate a variety of error models and refrain from simplifying assumptions, such as allowing, at most, one error per pedigree. In principle, almost any statistical genetic analysis can be performed taking errors into account, without actually correcting or deleting suspect genotypes. Three examples illustrate the possibilities. These examples make use of the full pedigree data, multiple linked markers, and a prior error model. The first example is the estimation of genotyping error rates from pedigree data. The second-and currently most useful-example is the computation of posterior mistyping probabilities. These probabilities cover both Mendelian-consistent and Mendelian-inconsistent errors. The third example is the selection of the true pedigree structure connecting a group of people from among several competing pedigree structures. Paternity testing and twin zygosity testing are typical applications.     

Identifying marker typing incompatibilities in linkage analysis.

A common problem encountered in linkage analyses is that execution of the computer program is halted because of genotypes in the data that are inconsistent with Mendelian inheritance. Such inconsistencies may arise because of pedigree errors or errors in typing. In some cases, the source of the inconsistencies is easily identified by examining the pedigree. In others, the error is not obvious, and substantial time and effort are required to identify the responsible genotypes. We have developed two methods for automatically identifying those individuals whose genotypes are most likely the cause of the inconsistencies. First, we calculate the posterior probability of genotyping error for each member of the pedigree, given the marker data on all pedigree members and allowing anyone in the pedigree to have an error. Second, we identify those individuals whose genotypes could be solely responsible for the inconsistency in the pedigree. We illustrate these methods with two examples: one a pedigree error, the second a genotyping error. These methods have been implemented as a module of the pedigree analysis program package MENDEL.     

Testing genetic models in populations which contain pedigree errors

In a genetic analysis of a polymorphic system, differences between the observed type of an individual and that expected from the parental types can arise either from an incorrect model or from pedigree errors. Such pedigree errors can cause severe difficulties in studies of the mode of inheritance of a novel polymorphic system. A method is proposed which overcomes the problem by including sire and dam error rates explicitly in the genetic model. The error rates are estimated by maximum likelihood, and likelihood ratio tests used to compare different models or estimates from different data sets. The proposals are applied to a study of the inheritance of the bovine serum AmI amylases.     

Comparative study of multipoint methods for genotype error detection

Several programs are currently available for the detection of genotyping error that may or may not be Mendelianly inconsistent. However, no systematic study exists that evaluates their performance under varying pedigree structures and sizes, marker spacing, and allele frequencies. Our simulation study compares four multipoint methods: Merlin, Mendel4, SimWalk2, and Sibmed. We look at empirical thresholds, power, and false-positive rates on 7 small pedigree structures that included sibships with and without genotyped parents, and a three-generation pedigree, using 11 microsatellite markers with 3 different map spacings. Simulated data includes 5,000 replicates of each pedigree structure and marker map, with random genotyping errors in about 4% of the middle marker's genotypes. We found that the default thresholds used by these programs provide low power (47-72%). Power is improved more by adding genotyped siblings than by using more closely spaced markers. Some mistyping methods are sensitive to the frequencies of the observed alleles. Siblings of mistyped individuals have elevated false-positive rates, as do markers close to the mistyped marker. We conclude that thresholds should be decided based on the pedigree and marker data and that greater focus should be placed on modeling genotyping error when computing likelihoods, rather than on detecting and eliminating genotyping errors.     

Quality Control of Genotypes Using Heritability Estimates of Gene Content at the Marker

Quality control filtering of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) is a key step when analyzing genomic data. Here we present a practical method to identify low-quality SNPs, meaning markers whose genotypes are wrongly assigned for a large proportion of individuals, by estimating the heritability of gene content at each marker, where gene content is the number of copies of a particular reference allele in a genotype of an animal (0, 1, or 2). If there is no mutation at the marker, gene content has an additive heritability of 1 by construction. The method uses restricted maximum likelihood (REML) to estimate heritability of gene content at each SNP and also builds a likelihood-ratio test statistic to test for zero error variance in genotyping. As a by-product, estimates of the allele frequencies of markers at the base population are obtained. Using simulated data with 10% permutation error (4% actual error) in genotyping, the method had a specificity of 0.96 (4% of correct markers are rejected) and a sensitivity of 0.99 (1% of wrong markers are accepted) if markers with heritability lower than 0.975 are discarded. Checking of Mendelian errors resulted in a lower sensitivity (0.84) for the same simulation. The proposed method is further illustrated with a real data set with genotypes from 3534 animals genotyped for 50,433 markers from the Illumina PorcineSNP60 chip and a pedigree of 6473 individuals; those markers underwent very little quality control. A total of 4099 markers with P-values lower than 0.01 were discarded based on our method, with associated estimates of heritability as low as 0.12. Contrary to other techniques, our method uses all information in the population simultaneously, can be used in any population with markers and pedigree recordings, and is simple to implement using standard software for REML estimation. Scripts for its use are provided.     

Detecting Identity by Descent and Estimating Genotype Error Rates in Sequence Data

Existing methods for identity by descent (IBD) segment detection were designed for SNP array data, not sequence data. Sequence data have a much higher density of genetic variants and a different allele frequency distribution, and can have higher genotype error rates. Consequently, best practices for IBD detection in SNP array data do not necessarily carry over to sequence data. We present a method, IBDseq, for detecting IBD segments in sequence data and a method, SEQERR, for estimating genotype error rates at low-frequency variants by using detected IBD. The IBDseq method estimates probabilities of genotypes observed with error for each pair of individuals under IBD and non-IBD models. The ratio of estimated probabilities under the two models gives a LOD score for IBD. We evaluate several IBD detection methods that are fast enough for application to sequence data (IBDseq, Beagle Refined IBD, PLINK, and GERMLINE) under multiple parameter settings, and we show that IBDseq achieves high power and accuracy for IBD detection in sequence data. The SEQERR method estimates genotype error rates by comparing observed and expected rates of pairs of homozygote and heterozygote genotypes at low-frequency variants in IBD segments. We demonstrate the accuracy of SEQERR in simulated data, and we apply the method to estimate genotype error rates in sequence data from the UK10K and 1000 Genomes projects.     

Noninvasive genotyping and Mendelian analysis of microsatellites in African savannah elephants

We obtained fresh dung samples from 202 (133 mother-offspring pairs) savannah elephants (Loxodonta africana) in Samburu, Kenya, and genotyped them at 20 microsatellite loci to assess genotyping success and errors. A total of 98.6% consensus genotypes was successfully obtained, with allelic dropout and false allele rates at 1.6% (n = 46) and 0.9% (n = 37) of heterozygous and total consensus genotypes, respectively, and an overall genotyping error rate of 2.5% based on repeat typing. Mendelian analysis revealed consistent inheritance in all but 38 allelic pairs from mother-offspring, giving an average mismatch error rate of 2.06%, a possible result of null alleles, mutations, genotyping errors, or inaccuracy in maternity assignment. We detected no evidence for large allele dropout, stuttering, or scoring error in the dataset and significant Hardy-Weinberg deviations at only two loci due to heterozygosity deficiency. Across loci, null allele frequencies were low (range: 0.000-0.042) and below the 0.20 threshold that would significantly bias individual-based studies. The high genotyping success and low errors observed in this study demonstrate reliability of the method employed and underscore the application of simple pedigrees in noninvasive studies. Since none of the sires were included in this study, the error rates presented are just estimates.     

Family-based association tests for genomewide association scans

With millions of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) identified and characterized, genomewide association studies have begun to identify susceptibility genes for complex traits and diseases. These studies involve the characterization and analysis of very-high-resolution SNP genotype data for hundreds or thousands of individuals. We describe a computationally efficient approach to testing association between SNPs and quantitative phenotypes, which can be applied to whole-genome association scans. In addition to observed genotypes, our approach allows estimation of missing genotypes, resulting in substantial increases in power when genotyping resources are limited. We estimate missing genotypes probabilistically using the Lander-Green or Elston-Stewart algorithms and combine high-resolution SNP genotypes for a subset of individuals in each pedigree with sparser marker data for the remaining individuals. We show that power is increased whenever phenotype information for ungenotyped individuals is included in analyses and that high-density genotyping of just three carefully selected individuals in a nuclear family can recover >90% of the information available if every individual were genotyped, for a fraction of the cost and experimental effort. To aid in study design, we evaluate the power of strategies that genotype different subsets of individuals in each pedigree and make recommendations about which individuals should be genotyped at a high density. To illustrate our method, we performed genomewide association analysis for 27 gene-expression phenotypes in 3-generation families (Centre d'Etude du Polymorphisme Humain pedigrees), in which genotypes for ~860,000 SNPs in 90 grandparents and parents are complemented by genotypes for ~6,700 SNPs in a total of 168 individuals. In addition to increasing the evidence of association at 15 previously identified cis-acting associated alleles, our genotype-inference algorithm allowed us to identify associated alleles at 4 cis-acting loci that were missed when analysis was restricted to individuals with the high-density SNP data. Our genotype-inference algorithm and the proposed association tests are implemented in software that is available for free.