A comparison of linkage disequilibrium patterns and estimated population recombination rates across multiple populations.
Large-scale studies of linkage disequilibrium (LD) have shown considerable variation in the extent and distribution of pairwise LD within and between populations. Taken at face value, these results suggest that genomewide LD maps for one population may not be generalizable to other populations. However, at least part of this diversity is due to some undesirable features of pairwise LD measures, which are well documented for the D' and r2 measures. In this report, we compare patterns of LD derived from pairwise measures with statistical estimates of population recombination rates ( rho ) along a 10-Mb stretch of chromosome 20 in four population samples, comprising East Asians, African Americans, and U.K. and U.S. individuals of western European descent. The results reveal the expected variability of D' within and between populations but show better concordance in estimates of r2 for the same markers across the population samples. Estimates of rho correlate well across populations, but there is still evidence of population-specific spikes and troughs in rho values. We conclude that it is unlikely that a single haplotype map will provide a definitive guide for association studies of many populations; rather, multiple maps will need to be constructed to provide the best-possible guides for gene mapping.
Evans
David M
DM
Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. davide@well.ox.ac.uk
Cardon
Lon R
LR
D001741:Black or African American / Q000235:genetics; D044466:Asian People / Q000235:genetics; D044383:Black People / Q000235:genetics; D002874:Chromosome Mapping; D002890:Chromosomes, Human, Pair 20; D005828:Genetics, Population; D006239:Haplotypes; D006801:Humans; D015810:Linkage Disequilibrium; D011995:Recombination, Genetic; D006113:United Kingdom; D014481:United States; D044465:White People / Q000235:genetics
Nature. 2000 Jun 15;405(6788):847-56
10866211
Am J Hum Genet. 2003 Aug;73(2):285-300
12844287
Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Jun;66(6):1882-99
10788337
Am J Hum Genet. 2001 Jan;68(1):191-197
11083947
Am J Hum Genet. 2001 Apr;68(4):978-89
11254454
Nature. 2001 May 10;411(6834):199-204
11346797
Nature. 2003 Dec 18;426(6968):789-96
14685227
Genetics. 2003 Dec;165(4):2213-33
14704198
Hum Mol Genet. 2004 Mar 15;13(6):577-88
14734624
Science. 2004 Apr 23;304(5670):581-4
15105499
Nat Genet. 2004 Jul;36(7):700-6
15184900
Nat Genet. 2004 Oct;36(10):1045-51
15454942
Genetics. 1987 Oct;117(2):331-41
3666445
Am J Hum Genet. 1994 Apr;54(4):705-14
8128969
Am J Hum Genet. 1994 Aug;55(2):348-55
7913583
Science. 1996 Mar 8;271(5254):1380-7
8596909
Science. 1996 Sep 13;273(5281):1516-7
8801636
Am J Hum Genet. 1998 Jun;62(6):1389-402
9585589
Hum Genet. 1998 Aug;103(2):211-27
9760208
Nat Genet. 1999 Jun;22(2):139-44
10369254
Am J Hum Genet. 2003 Nov;73(5):1162-9
14574645
Am J Hum Genet. 2001 Jul;69(1):1-14
11410837
Am J Hum Genet. 2001 Oct;69(4):831-43
11533915
Nat Genet. 2001 Oct;29(2):229-32
11586305
Nat Genet. 2001 Oct;29(2):233-7
11586306
Science. 2001 Nov 23;294(5547):1719-23
11721056
Genetics. 2001 Nov;159(3):1299-318
11729171
Trends Genet. 2002 Jan;18(1):19-24
11750696
Genetics. 2001 Dec;159(4):1805-17
11779816
Science. 2002 Jun 21;296(5576):2225-9
12029063
Nature. 2002 Aug 1;418(6897):544-8
12110843
Nat Genet. 2003 Mar;33(3):382-7
12590262
Trends Genet. 2003 Mar;19(3):135-40
12615007
Theor Popul Biol. 2003 May;63(3):245-55
12689795
Am J Hum Genet. 2000 Oct;67(4):901-25
10986042