Performance analysis of novel methods for detecting epistasis

被引:54
|
作者
Shang, Junliang [1 ]
Zhang, Junying [1 ]
Sun, Yan [2 ]
Liu, Dan [1 ]
Ye, Daojun [1 ]
Yin, Yaling [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Xidian Univ, Sch Comp Sci & Technol, Xian 710071, Peoples R China
[2] Shannxi Peoples Fine Arts Publishing House, Xian 710003, Peoples R China
[3] Xian Econ & Financial Univ, Informat Sch, Xian 710100, Peoples R China
来源
BMC BIOINFORMATICS | 2011年 / 12卷
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
MULTIFACTOR-DIMENSIONALITY REDUCTION; GENE-GENE INTERACTIONS; ASSOCIATION; INFERENCE; POWER;
D O I
10.1186/1471-2105-12-475
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
Background: Epistasis is recognized fundamentally important for understanding the mechanism of disease-causing genetic variation. Though many novel methods for detecting epistasis have been proposed, few studies focus on their comparison. Undertaking a comprehensive comparison study is an urgent task and a pathway of the methods to real applications. Results: This paper aims at a comparison study of epistasis detection methods through applying related software packages on datasets. For this purpose, we categorize methods according to their search strategies, and select five representative methods (TEAM, BOOST, SNPRuler, AntEpiSeeker and epiMODE) originating from different underlying techniques for comparison. The methods are tested on simulated datasets with different size, various epistasis models, and with/without noise. The types of noise include missing data, genotyping error and phenocopy. Performance is evaluated by detection power (three forms are introduced), robustness, sensitivity and computational complexity. Conclusions: None of selected methods is perfect in all scenarios and each has its own merits and limitations. In terms of detection power, AntEpiSeeker performs best on detecting epistasis displaying marginal effects (eME) and BOOST performs best on identifying epistasis displaying no marginal effects (eNME). In terms of robustness, AntEpiSeeker is robust to all types of noise on eME models, BOOST is robust to genotyping error and phenocopy on eNME models, and SNPRuler is robust to phenocopy on eME models and missing data on eNME models. In terms of sensitivity, AntEpiSeeker is the winner on eME models and both SNPRuler and BOOST perform well on eNME models. In terms of computational complexity, BOOST is the fastest among the methods. In terms of overall performance, AntEpiSeeker and BOOST are recommended as the efficient and effective methods. This comparison study may provide guidelines for applying the methods and further clues for epistasis detection.
引用
收藏
页数:17
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Eigen-Epistasis for detecting gene-gene interactions
    Stanislas, Virginie
    Dalmasso, Cyril
    Ambroise, Christophe
    BMC BIOINFORMATICS, 2017, 18
  • [42] Eigen-Epistasis for detecting gene-gene interactions
    Virginie Stanislas
    Cyril Dalmasso
    Christophe Ambroise
    BMC Bioinformatics, 18
  • [43] Efficiency of triple test cross for detecting epistasis with marker information
    Zhu, C.
    Zhang, R.
    HEREDITY, 2007, 98 (06) : 401 - 410
  • [44] FPGA-based acceleration of detecting statistical epistasis in GWAS
    Wienbrandt, Lars
    Kaessens, Jan Christian
    Gonzalez-Dominguez, Jorge
    Schmidt, Bertil
    Ellinghaus, David
    Sehimmler, Manfred
    2014 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTATIONAL SCIENCE, 2014, 29 : 220 - 230
  • [45] Detecting Epistasis with Restricted Response Patterns in Pairs of Biallelic Loci
    Wirapati, Pratyaksha
    Forner, Karl
    Delgado-Vega, Angelica
    Alarcon-Riquelme, Marta
    Delorenzi, Mauro
    Wojcik, Jerome
    ANNALS OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2011, 75 : 133 - 145
  • [46] Bayesian neural networks for detecting epistasis in genetic association studies
    Andrew L Beam
    Alison Motsinger-Reif
    Jon Doyle
    BMC Bioinformatics, 15
  • [47] Efficiency of triple test cross for detecting epistasis with marker information
    C Zhu
    R Zhang
    Heredity, 2007, 98 : 401 - 410
  • [48] Detecting the genomic signal of polygenic adaptation and the role of epistasis in evolution
    Csillery, Katalin
    Rodriguez-Verdugo, Alejandra
    Rellstab, Christian
    Guillaume, Frederic
    MOLECULAR ECOLOGY, 2018, 27 (03) : 606 - 612
  • [49] Bayesian neural networks for detecting epistasis in genetic association studies
    Beam, Andrew L.
    Motsinger-Reif, Alison
    Doyle, Jon
    BMC BIOINFORMATICS, 2014, 15
  • [50] New epistasis measures for detecting independently optimizable partitions of variables
    Seo, DI
    Choi, SS
    Moon, BR
    GENETIC AND EVOLUTIONARY COMPUTATION GECCO 2004 , PT 2, PROCEEDINGS, 2004, 3103 : 150 - 161