↓ Skip to main content

PLOS

Comparison of Strategies to Detect Epistasis from eQTL Data

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, December 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
citeulike
2 CiteULike
Title
Comparison of Strategies to Detect Epistasis from eQTL Data
Published in
PLOS ONE, December 2011
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0028415
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen Kapur, Thierry Schüpbach, Ioannis Xenarios, Zoltán Kutalik, Sven Bergmann

Abstract

Genome-wide association studies have been instrumental in identifying genetic variants associated with complex traits such as human disease or gene expression phenotypes. It has been proposed that extending existing analysis methods by considering interactions between pairs of loci may uncover additional genetic effects. However, the large number of possible two-marker tests presents significant computational and statistical challenges. Although several strategies to detect epistasis effects have been proposed and tested for specific phenotypes, so far there has been no systematic attempt to compare their performance using real data. We made use of thousands of gene expression traits from linkage and eQTL studies, to compare the performance of different strategies. We found that using information from marginal associations between markers and phenotypes to detect epistatic effects yielded a lower false discovery rate (FDR) than a strategy solely using biological annotation in yeast, whereas results from human data were inconclusive. For future studies whose aim is to discover epistatic effects, we recommend incorporating information about marginal associations between SNPs and phenotypes instead of relying solely on biological annotation. Improved methods to discover epistatic effects will result in a more complete understanding of complex genetic effects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 7%
China 1 2%
Denmark 1 2%
Ireland 1 2%
Unknown 38 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 39%
Researcher 12 27%
Professor > Associate Professor 7 16%
Student > Master 5 11%
Professor 1 2%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 2 5%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 64%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 16%
Computer Science 3 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 2%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 3 7%