Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T01:09:56.942Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Bayesian and maximum likelihood estimation of genetic maps

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2005

THOMAS L. YORK
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Statistics and Computational Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA
RICHARD T. DURRETT
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Statistics and Computational Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA Department of Mathematics, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA
STEVEN TANKSLEY
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Breeding, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA
RASMUS NIELSEN
Affiliation:
Department of Biological Statistics and Computational Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14850, USA Bioinformatics Center, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, 2100 Kbh Ø, Denmark Corresponding author. Current address: Bioinformatics Center, University of Copenhagen, Universitetsparken 15, Building 10, 2100 Kbh Ø, Denmark. Tel: +45 35 32 12 79. e-mail: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

There has recently been increased interest in the use of Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC)-based Bayesian methods for estimating genetic maps. The advantage of these methods is that they can deal accurately with missing data and genotyping errors. Here we present an extension of the previous methods that makes the Bayesian method applicable to large data sets. We present an extensive simulation study examining the statistical properties of the method and comparing it with the likelihood method implemented in Mapmaker. We show that the Maximum A Posteriori (MAP) estimator of the genetic distances, corresponding to the maximum likelihood estimator, performs better than estimators based on the posterior expectation. We also show that while the performance is similar between Mapmaker and the MCMC-based method in the absence of genotyping errors, the MCMC-based method has a distinct advantage in the presence of genotyping errors. A similar advantage of the Bayesian method was not observed for missing data. We also re-analyse a recently published set of data from the eggplant and show that the use of the MCMC-based method leads to smaller estimates of genetic distances.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2005 Cambridge University Press