MAXIMUM-LIKELIHOOD APPROACHES APPLIED TO QUANTITATIVE GENETICS OF NATURAL POPULATIONS

Growing interest in adaptive evolution in natural populations has spurred efforts to infer genetic components of variance and covariance of quantitative characters. Here, I review difficulties inherent in the usual least-squares methods of estimation. A useful alternative approach is that of maximum likelihood (ML). Its particular advantage over least squares is that estimation and testing procedures are well defined, regardless of the design of the data. A modified version of ML, REML, eliminates the bias of ML estimates of variance components. Expressions for the expected bias and variance of estimates obtained from balanced, fully hierarchical designs are presented for ML and REML. Analyses of data simulated from balanced, hierarchical designs reveal differences in the properties of ML, REML, and F-ratio tests of significance. A second simulation study compares properties of REML estimates obtained from a balanced, fully hierarchical design (within-generation analysis) with those from a sampling design including phenotypic data on parents and multiple progeny. It also illustrates the effects of imposing nonnegativity constraints on the estimates. Finally, it reveals that predictions of the behavior of significance tests based on asymptotic theory are not accurate when sample size is small and that constraining the estimates seriously affects properties of the tests. Because of their great flexibility, likelihood methods can serve as a useful tool for estimation of quantitative-genetic parameters in natural populations. Difficulties involved in hypothesis testing remain to be solved.     

Sampling distributions, biases, variances, and confidence intervals for genetic correlations

Genetic correlations are frequently estimated from natural and experimental populations, yet many of the statistical properties of estimators of are not known, and accurate methods have not been described for estimating the precision of estimates of Our objective was to assess the statistical properties of multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), restricted maximum likelihood (REML), and maximum likelihood (ML) estimators of by simulating bivariate normal samples for the one-way balanced linear model. We estimated probabilities of non-positive definite MANOVA estimates of genetic variance-covariance matrices and biases and variances of MANOVA, REML, and ML estimators of and assessed the accuracy of parametric, jackknife, and bootstrap variance and confidence interval estimators for MANOVA estimates of were normally distributed. REML and ML estimates were normally distributed for but skewed for and 0.9. All of the estimators were biased. The MANOVA estimator was less biased than REML and ML estimators when heritability (H), the number of genotypes (n), and the number of replications (r) were low. The biases were otherwise nearly equal for different estimators and could not be reduced by jackknifing or bootstrapping. The variance of the MANOVA estimator was greater than the variance of the REML or ML estimator for most H, n, and r. Bootstrapping produced estimates of the variance of close to the known variance, especially for REML and ML. The observed coverages of the REML and ML bootstrap interval estimators were consistently close to stated coverages, whereas the observed coverage of the MANOVA bootstrap interval estimator was unsatisfactory for some H, n, and r. The other interval estimators produced unsatisfactory coverages. REML and ML bootstrap interval estimates were narrower than MANOVA bootstrap interval estimates for most H, and r. Received: 6 July 1995 / Accepted: 8 March 1996     

REML estimation of variance parameters in nonlinear mixed effects models using the SAEM algorithm

Nonlinear mixed effects models are now widely used in biometrical studies, especially in pharmacokinetic research or for the analysis of growth traits for agricultural and laboratory species. Most of these studies, however, are often based on ML estimation procedures, which are known to be biased downwards. A few REML extensions have been proposed, but only for approximated methods. The aim of this paper is to present a REML implementation for nonlinear mixed effects models within an exact estimation scheme, based on an integration of the fixed effects and a stochastic estimation procedure. This method was implemented via a stochastic EM, namely the SAEM algorithm. The simulation study showed that the proposed REML estimation procedure considerably reduced the bias observed with the ML estimation, as well as the residual mean squared error of the variance parameter estimations, especially in the unbalanced cases. ML and REML based estimators of fixed effects were also compared via simulation. Although the two kinds of estimates were very close in terms of bias and mean square error, predictions of individual profiles were clearly improved when using REML vs. ML. An application of this estimation procedure is presented for the modelling of growth in lines of chicken.     

Variance component estimation techniques compared for two mating designs with forest genetic architecture through computer simulation

Computer simulation was used to compare minimum variance quadratic estimation (MIVQUE), minimum norm quadratic unbiased estimation (MINQUE), restricted maximum likelihood (REML), maximum likelihood (ML), and Henderson's Method 3 (HM3) on the basis of variance among estimates, mean square error (MSE), bias and probability of nearness for estimation of both individual variance components and three ratios of variance components. The investigation also compared three procedures for dealing with negative estimates and included the use of both individual observations and plot means as the experimental unit of the analysis. The structure of data simulated (field design, mating designs, genetic architecture and imbalance) represented typical analysis problems in quantitative forest genetics. Results of comparing the estimation techniques demonstrated that: estimates of probability of nearness did not discriminate among techniques; bias was discriminatory among procedures for dealing with negative estimates but not among estimation techniques (except ML); sampling variance among estimates was discriminatory among procedures for dealing with negative estimates, estimation techniques and unit of observation; and MSE provided no additional information to variance of the estimates. HM3 and REML were the closest competitors under these criteria; however, REML demonstrated greater robustness to imbalance. Of the three negative estimate procedures, two are of practical significance and guidelines for their application are presented. Estimates from individual observations were always preferable to those from plot means over the experimental levels of this study.This is Journal Series NO. R-03768 of the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences     

Evaluation and interpretation of results for three cross-over designs

In cross-over designs, individual sequences of treatments are applied to the animals. Within such designs it is possible that every treatment could modify the effect of the subsequent treatment applied to the same animal. We compared three cross-over designs each with three treatments, three periods, and two blocks. This comparison was done with respect to the variance of the estimations of the effects and its biases caused by the interactions between the treatment and the carry over effect of the foregoing treatment. Moreover, different methods of estimating variance components and calculating the degrees of freedom were compared by means of simulation. If the animal variance component is small, then the bias of the REML estimator of the variance components is greater than one of the widespread ANOVA-estimator called 'TYPE3'. But nevertheless, the mean squared error of this estimation is smaller in the case of REML in comparison to ANOVA. Therefore, the REML method should be preferred. For calculating the degrees of freedom, the Kenward-Roger method should be used. After applying this method, the true significance level is almost equal to its required value, but if the Satterthwaite method is used, the true significance level will be too high. If the interaction (treatment × carry over) is ignored in the model although it exists, the standard error of the treatment effect estimation is too great, and, therefore, the true significance level is too small. The methods which have been evaluated are available in the SAS-procedure MIXED (<citeref rid="b9">SAS Institute, 1999a</citeref>). To assist the investigation of cross-over designs by using this software, we developed programs for data management and data analysis. These programs are available from the first author.     

Estimating sampling error of evolutionary statistics based on genetic covariance matrices using maximum likelihood

We explore the estimation of uncertainty in evolutionary parameters using a recently devised approach for resampling entire additive genetic variance–covariance matrices ( G ). Large‐sample theory shows that maximum‐likelihood estimates (including restricted maximum likelihood, REML) asymptotically have a multivariate normal distribution, with covariance matrix derived from the inverse of the information matrix, and mean equal to the estimated G . This suggests that sampling estimates of G from this distribution can be used to assess the variability of estimates of G , and of functions of G . We refer to this as the REML‐MVN method. This has been implemented in the mixed‐model program WOMBAT. Estimates of sampling variances from REML‐MVN were compared to those from the parametric bootstrap and from a Bayesian Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) approach (implemented in the R package MCMCglmm). We apply each approach to evolvability statistics previously estimated for a large, 20‐dimensional data set for Drosophila wings. REML‐MVN and MCMC sampling variances are close to those estimated with the parametric bootstrap. Both slightly underestimate the error in the best‐estimated aspects of the G matrix. REML analysis supports the previous conclusion that the G matrix for this population is full rank. REML‐MVN is computationally very efficient, making it an attractive alternative to both data resampling and MCMC approaches to assessing confidence in parameters of evolutionary interest.     

Application of approximate variances of variance components and their ratios in genetic tests

The application and underlying assumptions of formulae used to estimate the variance of variance components and ratios of variance components are fully described for (1) variance components estimated using Henderson's Method 3 (HM3) and Restricted Maximum Likelihood (REML) and (2) ratios of variance components commonly used in genetic tests — biased and unbiased heritabilities. A first-order Taylor series approximation is often used to estimate the variance of a ratio of two random variables (e.g., heritability), however the formula is complicated, thus making calculations prone to errors. Dickerson's approximation is considerably simpler, though relatively rarely used. In case studies using data from 148 slash pine full-sib progeny tests, Dickerson's method was found to be slightly more conservative than the Taylor series approximation when estimating the variance of heritability estimates, regardless of test size, age, or the trait (volume, which is a continuous trait, and rust resistance, which is a bernoulli trait). Both the Taylor series and Dickerson approximations compared favorably with an empirical estimate of the variance of heritability estimates, however there is some evidence of small-sample bias associated with the use of the asymptotic variance-covariances from REML variance component estimation.This is Florida Agricultural Experiment Station Journal Series No. R-03964 of the Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA     

Comparison of REML and Gibbs sampling estimates of multi-trait genetic parameters in Scots pine

Multi-trait (co)variance estimation is an important topic in plant and animal breeding. In this study we compare estimates obtained with restricted maximum likelihood (REML) and Bayesian Gibbs sampling of simulated data and of three traits (diameter, height and branch angle) from a 26-year-old partial diallel progeny test of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.). Based on the results from the simulated data we can conclude that the REML estimates are accurate but the mode of posterior distributions from the Gibbs sampling can be overestimated depending on the level of the heritability. The mean and median of the posteriors were considerably higher than the expected values of the heritabilities. The confidence intervals calculated with the delta method were biased downwardly. The highest probablity density (HPD) interval provides a better interval estimate, but could be slightly biased at the lower level. Similar differences between REML and Gibbs sampling estimates were found for the Scots pine data. We conclude that further simulation studies are needed in order to evaluate the effect of different priors on (co)variance components in the genetic individual model.     

A comparison of methods to estimate cross-environment genetic correlations

Advanced techniques for quantitative genetic parameter estimation may not always be necessary to answer broad genetic questions. However, simpler methods are often biased, and the extent of this determines their usefulness. In this study we compare family mean correlations to least squares and restricted error maximum likelihood (REML) variance component approaches to estimating cross-environment genetic correlations. We analysed empirical data from studies where both types of estimates were made, and from studies in our own laboratories. We found that the agreement between estimates was better when full-sib rather than half-sib estimates of cross-environment genetic correlations were used and when mean family size increased. We also note biases in REML estimation that may be especially important when testing to see if correlations differ from 0 or 1. We conclude that correlations calculated from family means can be used to test for the presence of genetic correlations across environments, which is sufficient for some research questions. Variance component approaches should be used when parameter estimation is the objective, or if the goal is anything other than determining broad patterns.     

多元方差分析中的单一自由度独立比较

本文根据一元方差分析的单一自由度比较原理提出了多元方差分析中的单一自由度比较方法,以用于各种平衡试验设计中具多个变量的处理间多重比较．     

Estimating effects of a single gene and polygenes on quantitative traits from a diallel design

A genetic model is developed with additive and dominance effects of a single gene and polygenes as well as general and specific reciprocal effects for the progeny from a diallel mating design. The methods of ANOVA, minimum norm quadratic unbiased estimation (MINQUE), restricted maximum likelihood estimation (REML), and maximum likelihood estimation (ML) are suggested for estimating variance components, and the methods of generalized least squares (GLS) and ordinary least squares (OLS) for fixed effects, while best linear unbiased prediction, linear unbiased prediction (LUP), and adjusted unbiased prediction are suggested for analyzing random effects. Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to evaluate the unbiasedness and efficiency of statistical methods involving two diallel designs with commonly used sample sizes, 6 and 8 parents, with no and missing crosses, respectively. Simulation results show that GLS and OLS are almost equally efficient for estimation of fixed effects, while MINQUE (1) and REML are better estimators of the variance components and LUP is most practical method for prediction of random effects. Data from a Drosophila melanogaster experiment (Gilbert 1985a, Theor appl Genet 69:625–629) were used as a working example to demonstrate the statistical analysis. The new methodology is also applicable to screening candidate gene(s) and to other mating designs with multiple parents, such as nested (NC Design I) and factorial (NC Design II) designs. Moreover, this methodology can serve as a guide to develop new methods for detecting indiscernible major genes and mapping quantitative trait loci based on mixture distribution theory. The computer program for the methods suggested in this article is freely available from the authors.     

Making decisions about the optimal selection environment using Gibbs sampling

The use of Gibbs sampling in making decisions about the optimal selection environment was demonstrated. Marginal posterior distributions of the efficiency of selection across sites were obtained using the Gibbs sampler, a Bayesian method, from which the probability that the efficiency of selection lay between specified values and the variance of the distribution were computed, providing a lot of information on which to make decisions regarding the location of genetic tests. The heritability, genetic correlations and efficiencies of selection estimated using REML and Gibbs sampling were similar. However, the latter approach showed that the point estimates of the efficiencies of selection were subject to substantial error. The decision regarding selection at maturity was consistent with that obtained using point estimates from REML, but Gibbs sampling allowed the efficiencies of selection to be interpreted with more confidence. The decision regarding early selection differed from that based on REML point estimates. Generally, the decisions to make early selections at site B for planting at both site B and A, and to make selections at maturity at each individual site, were robust to different priors in the Gibbs sampling. Received: 19 June 2000 / Accepted: 18 October 2000     

THE MIXED-MODEL ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE APPLIED TO QUANTITATIVE GENETICS: BIOLOGICAL MEANING OF THE PARAMETERS

The mixed-model factorial analysis of variance has been used in many recent studies in evolutionary quantitative genetics. Two competing formulations of the mixed-model ANOVA are commonly used, the “Scheffe” model and the “SAS” model; these models differ in both their assumptions and in the way in which variance components due to the main effect of random factors are defined. The biological meanings of the two variance component definitions have often been unappreciated, however. A full understanding of these meanings leads to the conclusion that the mixed-model ANOVA could have been used to much greater effect by many recent authors. The variance component due to the random main effect under the two-way SAS model is the covariance in true means associated with a level of the random factor (e.g., families) across levels of the fixed factor (e.g., environments). Therefore the SAS model has a natural application for estimating the genetic correlation between a character expressed in different environments and testing whether it differs from zero. The variance component due to the random main effect under the two-way Scheffe model is the variance in marginal means (i.e., means over levels of the fixed factor) among levels of the random factor. Therefore the Scheffe model has a natural application for estimating genetic variances and heritabilities in populations using a defined mixture of environments. Procedures and assumptions necessary for these applications of the models are discussed. While exact significance tests under the SAS model require balanced data and the assumptions that family effects are normally distributed with equal variances in the different environments, the model can be useful even when these conditions are not met (e.g., for providing an unbiased estimate of the across-environment genetic covariance). Contrary to statements in a recent paper, exact significance tests regarding the variance in marginal means as well as unbiased estimates can be readily obtained from unbalanced designs with no restrictive assumptions about the distributions or variance-covariance structure of family effects.     

Employing a Monte Carlo Algorithm in Newton-Type Methods for Restricted Maximum Likelihood Estimation of Genetic Parameters

Estimation of variance components by Monte Carlo (MC) expectation maximization (EM) restricted maximum likelihood (REML) is computationally efficient for large data sets and complex linear mixed effects models. However, efficiency may be lost due to the need for a large number of iterations of the EM algorithm. To decrease the computing time we explored the use of faster converging Newton-type algorithms within MC REML implementations. The implemented algorithms were: MC Newton-Raphson (NR), where the information matrix was generated via sampling; MC average information(AI), where the information was computed as an average of observed and expected information; and MC Broyden''s method, where the zero of the gradient was searched using a quasi-Newton-type algorithm. Performance of these algorithms was evaluated using simulated data. The final estimates were in good agreement with corresponding analytical ones. MC NR REML and MC AI REML enhanced convergence compared to MC EM REML and gave standard errors for the estimates as a by-product. MC NR REML required a larger number of MC samples, while each MC AI REML iteration demanded extra solving of mixed model equations by the number of parameters to be estimated. MC Broyden''s method required the largest number of MC samples with our small data and did not give standard errors for the parameters directly. We studied the performance of three different convergence criteria for the MC AI REML algorithm. Our results indicate the importance of defining a suitable convergence criterion and critical value in order to obtain an efficient Newton-type method utilizing a MC algorithm. Overall, use of a MC algorithm with Newton-type methods proved feasible and the results encourage testing of these methods with different kinds of large-scale problem settings.     

Conditional Point Estimation in Adaptive Group Sequential Test Designs

It is well known that point estimates in group sequential designs are biased. This also applies to adaptive designs that enable, e.g., data driven reassessments of group sample sizes. For triangular designs, Whitehead (1986) (Biometrika 73 , 573–581) proposed a bias adjusted estimate. But this estimate is not feasible in adaptive designs although it is in group sequential designs. Furthermore, there is a waste of information because it does not use the information at which stage the trial was stopped. We present a modification which does use this information and which is applicable to adaptive designs. The modified estimate achieves an improvement in group sequential designs and shows similar results in adaptive designs.     

Closed-Form Approximations to the REML Estimator of a Variance Ratio (or Heritability) in a Mixed Linear Model

In this article, we estimate heritability or intraclass correlation in a mixed linear model having two sources of variation. In most applications, the commonly used restricted maximum likelihood (REML) estimator can only be obtained via an iterative approach. In some cases, the algorithm used to compute REML estimates may be slow or may even fail to converge. We develop a set of closed-form approximations to the REML estimator, and the performance of these estimators is compared with that of the REML estimator. We provide guidelines regarding how to choose the estimator that best approximates the REML estimator. Examples presented in the article suggest that the closed-form estimators compete with and, in some cases, outperform the REML estimator.     

Two-way minimization: a novel treatment allocation method for small trials

Randomization is a hallmark of clinical trials. If a trial entails very few subjects and has many prognostic factors (or many factor levels) to be balanced, minimization is a more efficient method to achieve balance than a simple randomization. We propose a novel minimization method, the 'two-way minimization'. The method separately calculates the 'imbalance in the total numbers of subjects' and the 'imbalance in the distributions of prognostic factors'. And then to allocate a subject, it chooses--by probability--to minimize either one of these two aspects of imbalances. As such, it is a method that is both treatment-adaptive and covariate-adaptive. We perform Monte-Carlo simulations to examine its statistical properties. The two-way minimization (with proper regression adjustment of the force-balanced prognostic factors) has the correct type I error rates. It also produces point estimates that are unbiased and variance estimates that are accurate. When there are important prognostic factors to be balanced in the study, the method achieves the highest power and the smallest variance among randomization methods that are resistant to selection bias. The allocation can be done in real time and the subsequent data analysis is straightforward. The two-way minimization is recommended to balance prognostic factors in small trials.     

Could ecologists be more random? Straightforward alternatives to haphazard spatial sampling

When conducting field studies, it is common for ecologists to choose the locations of sampling units arbitrarily at the time sampling occurs, rather than using a properly randomised sampling design. Unfortunately, this ‘haphazard’ sampling approach cannot provide formal statistical inference from the sample to the population without making untestable assumptions. Here, we argue that two recent technological developments remove the need for haphazard sampling in many situations. A general approach to simple randomised sampling designs is outlined, and some examples demonstrate that even complicated designs can be implemented easily using software that is widely used among ecologists. We consider that more rigorous, randomised sampling designs would strengthen the validity of the conclusions drawn from ecological studies, to the benefit of the discipline as a whole.     

CRUST: Software for the implementation of Regional Chronology Standardisation: Part 2. Further RCS options and recommendations

A number of processing options associated with the use of a “regional curve” to standardise tree-ring measurements and generate a chronology representing changing tree growth over time are discussed. It is shown that failing to use pith offset estimates can generate a small but systematic chronology error. Where chronologies contain long-timescale signal variance, tree indices created by division of the raw measurements by RCS curve values produce chronologies with a skewed distribution. A simple empirical method of converting tree-indices to have a normal distribution is proposed. The Expressed Population Signal, which is widely used to estimate the statistical confidence of chronologies created using curve-fitting methods of standardisation, is not suitable for use with RCS generated chronologies. An alternative implementation, which takes account of the uncertainty associated with long-timescale as well as short-timescale chronology variance, is proposed. The need to assess the homogeneity of differently-sourced sets of measurement data and their suitability for amalgamation into a single data set for RCS standardisation is discussed. The possible use of multiple growth-rate based RCS curves is considered where a potential gain in chronology confidence must be balanced against the potential loss of long-timescale variance. An approach to the use of the “signal-free” method for generating artificial measurement series with the ‘noise’ characteristics of real data series but with a known chronology signal applied for testing standardisation performance is also described.