Department of Forest and Conservation Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Department of Plant Biology, University of Minnesota, Saint Paul, MN 55108.
J Hered. 2017 Dec 21;109(1):16-28. doi: 10.1093/jhered/esx042.
Genomic "scans" to identify loci that contribute to local adaptation are becoming increasingly common. Many methods used for such studies have assumed that local adaptation is created by loci experiencing antagonistic pleiotropy (AP) and that the selected locus itself is assayed, and few consider how signals of selection change through time. However, most empirical data sets have marker density too low to assume that a selected locus itself is assayed, researchers seldom know when selection was first imposed, and many locally adapted loci likely experience not AP but conditional neutrality (CN). We simulated data to evaluate how these factors affect the performance of tests for genotype-environment association (GEA). We found that 3 types of regression-based analyses (linear models, mixed linear models, and latent factor mixed models) and an implementation of BayEnv all performed well, with high rates of true positives and low rates of false positives, when the selected locus experienced AP, and when the selected locus was assayed directly. However, all tests had reduced power to detect loci experiencing CN, and the probability of detecting associations was sharply reduced when physically linked rather than causative loci were sampled. AP also maintained detectable GEAs much longer than CN. Our analyses suggest that if local adaptation is often driven by loci experiencing CN, genome-scan methods will have limited capacity to find loci responsible for local adaptation.
基因组“扫描”以识别导致局部适应的基因座正变得越来越普遍。许多用于此类研究的方法假设局部适应是由经历拮抗多效性 (AP) 的基因座创建的,并且选择的基因座本身正在进行检测,很少考虑选择信号如何随时间变化。然而,大多数经验数据集的标记密度太低,无法假设选择的基因座本身正在进行检测,研究人员很少知道选择最初是何时施加的,并且许多局部适应的基因座可能经历的不是 AP,而是条件中性 (CN)。我们模拟了数据,以评估这些因素如何影响基因型-环境关联 (GEA) 测试的性能。我们发现,当选择的基因座经历 AP 时,当直接检测选择的基因座时,3 种基于回归的分析(线性模型、混合线性模型和潜在因子混合模型)和 BayEnv 的一种实现都表现良好,具有高真阳性率和低假阳性率。然而,所有测试检测经历 CN 的基因座的能力都降低了,当采样的是物理上关联而非因果基因座时,检测关联的可能性大大降低。AP 也比 CN 更长时间保持可检测的 GEA。我们的分析表明,如果局部适应通常是由经历 CN 的基因座驱动的,那么基因组扫描方法将无法有效找到导致局部适应的基因座。