Tang Min-Zhong, Li Jun, Cai Yong-Lin, Zheng Yu-Ming, Liao Jian, Zeng Hong, O'Brien Stephen, Zeng Yi
College of Life Science and Bio-engineering, Beijing University of Technology, Beijing 100022, China.
Zhonghua Shi Yan He Lin Chuang Bing Du Xue Za Zhi. 2012 Aug;26(4):288-90.
We evaluated the accuracy and efficiency of computational inference methods for haplotype on estimate HLA-A-B-C haplotype frequencies by compared with the haplotypes manually defined in a family-base dataset.
558 individuals with pedigree information were selected, and their haplotyps were compared with the data obtained by the following three method: the Expectation-Maximization (EM) and Excoffier-Laval-Balding (ELB)algorithms using the AELEQUIN software, and the SAS/Genetics PROC HAPLOTYPE method.
After performing the SAS/Genetics method, and the Expectation-Maximization (EM) and Excoffier-Laval-Balding (ELB) algorithms using the AELEQUIN software, 248, 247, and 238 different haplotypes were obtained respectively. The accuracy rates of these three methods were 88.5%, 89.1%, and 90.3% respectively. There are no significant different in the accuracy and estimated haplotype frequency comparisons among any two of these computational inference methods.
High accuracy haplotype frequency estimate rates could be obtained by these three computational inference methods, and there are no significant difference in the comparison of haplotypes estimated by SAS/Genetics, the EM and ELB algorithms using the AELEQUIN software. However, ELB algorithm shows better performance than EM algorithm and SAS/Genetics PROC HAPLOTYPE method for haplotype frequencies estimation in general.
通过与基于家系数据集中手动定义的单倍型进行比较,评估计算推断方法估计HLA - A - B - C单倍型频率的准确性和效率。
选择558名有谱系信息的个体,并将他们的单倍型与通过以下三种方法获得的数据进行比较:使用AELEQUIN软件的期望最大化(EM)和Excoffier - Laval - Balding(ELB)算法,以及SAS/Genetics PROC HAPLOTYPE方法。
在执行SAS/Genetics方法、使用AELEQUIN软件的期望最大化(EM)和Excoffier - Laval - Balding(ELB)算法后,分别获得了248、247和238种不同的单倍型。这三种方法的准确率分别为88.5%、89.1%和90.3%。在这些计算推断方法中的任意两种之间,准确性和估计单倍型频率比较没有显著差异。
这三种计算推断方法可以获得较高的单倍型频率估计率,并且在比较SAS/Genetics、使用AELEQUIN软件的EM和ELB算法估计的单倍型时没有显著差异。然而,总体而言,ELB算法在单倍型频率估计方面比EM算法和SAS/Genetics PROC HAPLOTYPE方法表现更好。