28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The future of parentage analysis: From microsatellites to SNPs and beyond

      1 , 2
      Molecular Ecology
      Wiley

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references144

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Statistical confidence for likelihood-based paternity inference in natural populations.

          Paternity inference using highly polymorphic codominant markers is becoming common in the study of natural populations. However, multiple males are often found to be genetically compatible with each offspring tested, even when the probability of excluding an unrelated male is high. While various methods exist for evaluating the likelihood of paternity of each nonexcluded male, interpreting these likelihoods has hitherto been difficult, and no method takes account of the incomplete sampling and error-prone genetic data typical of large-scale studies of natural systems. We derive likelihood ratios for paternity inference with codominant markers taking account of typing error, and define a statistic delta for resolving paternity. Using allele frequencies from the study population in question, a simulation program generates criteria for delta that permit assignment of paternity to the most likely male with a known level of statistical confidence. The simulation takes account of the number of candidate males, the proportion of males that are sampled and gaps and errors in genetic data. We explore the potentially confounding effect of relatives and show that the method is robust to their presence under commonly encountered conditions. The method is demonstrated using genetic data from the intensively studied red deer (Cervus elaphus) population on the island of Rum, Scotland. The Windows-based computer program, CERVUS, described in this study is available from the authors. CERVUS can be used to calculate allele frequencies, run simulations and perform parentage analysis using data from all types of codominant markers.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            COLONY: a program for parentage and sibship inference from multilocus genotype data.

            Pedigrees, depicting genealogical relationships between individuals, are important in several research areas. Molecular markers allow inference of pedigrees in wild species where relationship information is impossible to collect by observation. Marker data are analysed statistically using methods based on Mendelian inheritance rules. There are numerous computer programs available to conduct pedigree analysis, but most software is inflexible, both in terms of assumptions and data requirements. Most methods only accommodate monogamous diploid species using codominant markers without genotyping error. In addition, most commonly used methods use pairwise comparisons rather than a full-pedigree likelihood approach, which considers the likelihood of the entire pedigree structure and allows the simultaneous inference of parentage and sibship. Here, we describe colony, a computer program implementing full-pedigree likelihood methods to simultaneously infer sibship and parentage among individuals using multilocus genotype data. colony can be used for both diploid and haplodiploid species; it can use dominant and codominant markers, and can accommodate, and estimate, genotyping error at each locus. In addition, colony can carry out these inferences for both monoecious and dioecious species. The program is available as a Microsoft Windows version, which includes a graphical user interface, and a Macintosh version, which uses an R-based interface. © 2009 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Current trends in microsatellite genotyping.

              Microsatellites have been popular molecular markers ever since their advent in the late eighties. Despite growing competition from new genotyping and sequencing techniques, the use of these versatile and cost-effective markers continues to increase, boosted by successive technical advances. First, methods for multiplexing PCR have considerably improved over the last years, thereby decreasing genotyping costs and increasing throughput. Second, next-generation sequencing technologies allow the identification of large numbers of microsatellite loci at reduced cost in non-model species. As a consequence, more stringent selection of loci is possible, thereby further enhancing multiplex quality and efficiency. However, current practices are lagging behind. By surveying recently published population genetic studies relying on simple sequence repeats, we show that more than half of the studies lack appropriate quality controls and do not make use of multiplex PCR. To make the most of the latest technical developments, we outline the need for a well-established strategy including standardized high-throughput bench protocols and specific bioinformatic tools, from primer design to allele calling. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Molecular Ecology
                Mol Ecol
                Wiley
                0962-1083
                1365-294X
                February 13 2019
                February 2019
                February 06 2019
                February 2019
                : 28
                : 3
                : 544-567
                Affiliations
                [1 ]School of Biological Sciences University of Canterbury Christchurch New Zealand
                [2 ]Department of Biological Sciences University of Idaho Moscow Idaho
                Article
                10.1111/mec.14988
                30575167
                3b08812b-ddb8-4950-b6cd-87769a29bf18
                © 2019

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#am

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article