Author Correction: Genetic relatedness analysis: modern data and new challenges (Nature Reviews Genetics, (2006), 7, 10, (771-780), 10.1038/nrg1960);Genetic relatedness analysis: Modern data and new challenges

Nature Reviews Genetics

Volumn 7, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 771-780

  Weir, Bruce S ^a   Anderson, Amy D ^a   Hepler, Amanda B ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BAYES THEOREM; GENETIC LINKAGE; GENETIC VARIABILITY; GENOTYPE; HUMAN; MAXIMUM LIKELIHOOD METHOD; NONHUMAN; POPULATION GENETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; QUANTITATIVE TRAIT; REVIEW; SINGLE NUCLEOTIDE POLYMORPHISM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 33748786787     PISSN: 14710056     EISSN: 14710064     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/s41576-021-00445-6     Document Type: Erratum

References (36)

1. Bowers, J. E. & Meredith, C. E. The parentage of a classic wine grape: Cabernet Sauvignon. Nature Genet. 16, 84-87 (1997).
2. Jeffreys, A. J., Wilson, V. & Thein, S. L. Individual-specific fingerprints of human DNA. Nature 316, 76-79 (1985).
3. Harris, D. L. Genotypic covariances between inbred relatives. Genetics 50, 1319-1348 (1964). An early paper in which co-variances in trait values between individuals are expressed as functions of IBD probabilities.
4. Brenner, C. H. & Weir, B. S. Issues and strategies in the DNA identification of World Trade Center victims. Theor. Popul. Biol. 63, 173-178 (2003). Describes the procedures that are used to identify victims from mass disasters using DNA from known relatives, with a focus on statistical, combinatorial and population genetic issues.
5. Wenk, R. E. & Chiafari, F. A. Distinguishing full siblings from half-siblings in limited pedigrees. Transfusion 40, 44-47 (2000).
6. Gaytmenn, R., Hildebrand, D. P., Sweet, D. & Pretty, I. A. Determination of the sensitivity and specificity of sibship calculations using AmpF/STR Profiler Plus. Int. J. Legal Med. 116, 161-164 (2002).
7. Reid, T. M. et al. Specificity of sibship determination using the ABI identifiler multiplex system. J. Forensic Sci. 49, 1262-1264 (2004).
8. Tzeng, C. H. et al. Determination of sibship by PCR-amplified short tandem repeat analysis in Taiwan. Transfusion 40, 840-845 (2000).
9. Bieber, F. R., Brenner, C. H. & Lazer, D. Finding criminals through DNA of their relatives. Science 312, 1315-1316 (2006).
10. Olaisen, B., Stenersen, M. & Mevag, B. Identification by DNA analysis of the victims of the August 1996 Spitsbergen civil aircraft disaster. Nature Genet. 15, 402-405 (1997).
11. Leclair, B., Fegeau, C. J., Bowen, K. L. & Fourney, R. M. Enhanced kinship analysis and STR-based DNA typing for human identification in mass fatality incidents: the Swissair Flight 111 disaster. J. Forensic Sci. 49, 939-953 (2004).
12. Thompson, E. A. Estimation of pairwise relationships. Ann. Hum. Genet. 39, 173-188 (1975). The classical treatment of maximum likelihood estimation of the three-parameter set of relatedness measures for non-inbred relatives.
13. Milligan, B. G. Maximum-likelihood estimation of relatedness. Genetics 163, 1153-1167 (2003). An important demonstration of the superiority of maximum likelihood methods. Contains details on the implementation and performance of maximum likelihood relatedness estimation when the individuals who are being compared might be inbred.
14. Yu, J. et al. A unified mixed-model method for association mapping accounting for multiple levels of relatedness. Nature Genet. 38, 203-208 (2006).
15. Liu, W. & Weir, B. S. Affected sib-pair tests in inbred populations. Ann. Hum. Genet. 68, 606-619 (2004). The authors develop an analogue of a standard affected sib-pair test for linkage for use in inbred populations.
16. Balding, D. J. & Nichols, R. A. DNA profile match probability calculation: how to allow for population stratification, relatedness, database selection and single bands. Forensic Sci. Int. 64, 125-140 (1994). One of the early papers that deals with the calculation of genotype probabilities for individuals who are allowed to come from a subpopulation of the population from which the allele frequencies have been calculated.
17. Ewens, W. J. Mathematical Population Genetics. 1. Theoretical Introduction 2nd edn (Springer, New York, 2004). A useful reference that contains a treatment of the theory that underlies the calculation of genotypic probabilities for structured populations.
18. Hinds, D. A. et al. Whole-genome patterns of common DNA variation in three human populations. Science 307, 1072-1079 (2005).
19. International HapMap Consortium. A haplotype map of the human genome. Nature 437, 1299-1320 (2005).
20. Ayres, K. The expected performance of single nucleotide polymorphism loci in paternity testing. Forensic Sci. Int. 154, 167-172 (2005).
21. Sobrino, B., Brion, M. & Carracedo, A. SNPs in forensic genetics: a review of SNP typing methodologies. Forensic Sci. Int. 154, 181-194 (2005). Shows that when IBD is measured with respect to distant ancestry, IBD sharing between two individuals varies appreciably across the genome.
22. Gill, P. An assessment of the utility of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for forensic purposes. Int. J. Legal Med. 114, 204-210 (2001).
23. Amorim, A. & Pereira, L. Pros and cons in the use of SNPs in forensic kinship investigation: a comparative analysis with STRs. Forensic Sci. Int. 150, 17-21 (2005).
24. Hepler, A. B. Improving Forensic Identification using Bayesian Networks and Relatedness Estimation. Ph.D. Thesis, North Carolina State Univ., Raleigh (2005).
25. Weir, B. S., Cardon, L., Anderson, A. D., Nielsen, D. M. & Hill, W. G. Heterogeneity of measures of population structure along the human genome. Genome Res. 15, 1468-1476 (2005).
26. Ballantyne, J. Mass disaster genetics. Nature Genet. 15, 329-331 (1997).
27. DeWoody, J. A. Molecular approaches to the study of parentage, relatedness, and fitness: practical applications for wild animals. J. Wildl. Manage. 69, 1400-1418 (2005).
28. Williams, C. L., Serfass, T. L., Cogan, R. & Rhodes, O. E. Microsatellite variation in the reintroduced Pennsylvania elk herd. Mol. Ecol. 11, 1299-1310 (2002).
29. Slager, S. L. & Schaid, D. J. Evaluation of candidate genes in case-control studies: a statistical method to account for related subjects. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 68, 1457-1462 (2001).
30. Voight, B. F. & Pritchard, J. K. Confounding from cryptic relatedness in case-control association studies. PLoS Genet. 1, 302-311 (2005). Demonstrates that unknown relatedness between supposedly unrelated cases or controls can lead to an increased false-positive rate in genetic association studies.
31. Devlin, B. & Roeder, K. Genomic control for association studies. Biometrics 55, 997-1004 (1999).
32. Merila, J. & Crnokrak, P. Comparison of genetic differentiation at marker loci and quantitative traits. J. Evol. Biol. 14, 892-903 (2001).
33. Cockerham, C. C. Higher order probability functions of identity of alleles by descent. Genetics 69, 235-246 (1971). Cockerham considers the sharing of IBD alleles between two individuals in terms of 15 IBD parameters, develops procedures for calculating the values of these parameters from pedigree data and examines their properties under various mating schemes.
34. Jacquard, A. Structures Génétiques des Populations (Masson & Cie, Paris, 1970);
35. English translation available in Charlesworth, D. & Chalesworth, B. Genetics of Human Populations (Springer, New York, 1974). Considers relatedness in terms of nine IBD coefficients: these are now the most commonly used parameters for describing relatedness between two (possibly inbred) individuals.
36. Budowle, B. & Moretti, T. R. Genotype profiles for six population groups at the 13 CODIS short tandem repeat core loci and other PCR-based loci. US Department of Justice Forensic Science Communications [online], 〈http://www.fbi.gov/hq/lab/fsc/backissu/july1999/budowle.htm〉 (1999).