The Illusion of Polygenicity in Poolseq studies: Insufficient Power Can Mask Simple Genetic Architectures
Long, A. D.; Hanson, K. M.; Macdonald, S. J.
Show abstract
Pool-seq (pooled sequencing) combines DNA from multiple individuals prior to sequencing, enabling population-level allele frequency estimation without individual genotyping. When employed in Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) pool-seq faces a fundamental power limitation in that errors on allele frequency estimates are proportional to sequence coverage. Although this power limitation is widely appreciated, pool-seq GWAS lacking unambiguous hits are often interpreted as showing a highly polygenic genetic architecture. We illustrate the limitation of inferring architecture from Manhattan plots using empirical data from a Drosophila zinc resistance mapping study. Despite achieving an average of >700x sequencing coverage in case and control pools, a directly ascertained SNP-based GWAS failed to reveal clear evidence for major-effect loci. A unique feature of the dataset is that an advanced intercross multiparent population, with known founders, was employed as the base population for the GWAS. We leverage this unique population structure to carry out a second GWAS using imputed haplotype frequency estimates, which in contrast revealed localized regions of major effect. A third reanalysis of the same data using imputed SNP genotypes derived from the founder haplotype frequency estimates uncovered a similar major gene architecture. The key difference between approaches lies in statistical power: directly ascertained SNP counts have errors proportional to sequencing coverage whereas known founder imputation-based approaches can be considerably more accurate. This work highlights that insufficiently powered GWAS studies can mask simple genetic architectures and create the illusion of polygenicity through statistical noise alone.
Matching journals
The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Which mouse multiparental population is right for your study? The Collaborative Cross inbred strains, their F1 hybrids, or the Diversity Outbred population 95%
- Courtship song differs between African and European populations of Drosophila melanogaster and involves a strong effect locus 93%
- Limited population structure but signals of recent selection in introduced African Fig Fly (Zaprionus indianus) in North America 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Accurate, ultra-low coverage genome reconstruction and association studies in Hybrid Swarm mapping populations 96%
- The genetic basis of Drosophila melanogaster defense against Beauveria bassiana explored through evolve and resequence and quantitative trait locus mapping 93%
- Modeling Allelic Diversity of Multi-parent Mapping Populations Affects Detection of Quantitative Trait Loci 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Domestication Reshaped the Genetic Basis of Inbreeding Depression in a Maize Landrace Compared to its Wild Relative, Teosinte 92%
- Imbalanced segregation of recombinant haplotypes in hybrid populations reveals inter- and intrachromosomal Dobzhansky-Muller incompatibilities 92%
- A novel expectation-maximization approach to infer general diploid selection from time-series genetic data 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.