Supervised Machine Learning for Population Genetics: A New Paradigm

Trends in Genetics

Volumn 34, Issue 4, 2018, Pages 301-312

  Schrider, Daniel R ^a   Kern, Andrew D ^a  

^a Life Sciences Building Rutgers University   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DEMOGRAPHY; GENETIC RECOMBINATION; GENOMICS; HUMAN; HUMAN GENOME; MACHINE LEARNING; POPULATION GENETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PURIFYING SELECTION; REVIEW; SELECTIVE SWEEP; SUPERVISED MACHINE LEARNING; DATA MINING; EVOLUTION; GENETIC SELECTION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PROCEDURES;

BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION; DATA MINING; DATASETS AS TOPIC; GENETICS, POPULATION; GENOME, HUMAN; HUMANS; SELECTION, GENETIC; SUPERVISED MACHINE LEARNING;

EID: 85040377657     PISSN: 01689525     EISSN: 13624555     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tig.2017.12.005     Document Type: Review

References (90)

1. Breiman, L., Statistical modeling: the two cultures (with comments and a rejoinder by the author). Stat. Sci. 16 (2001), 199–231.
2. Elyashiv, E., et al. A genomic map of the effects of linked selection in Drosophila. PLoS Genet., 12, 2016, e1006130.
3. Hinton, G., et al. Deep neural networks for acoustic modeling in speech recognition: The shared views of four research groups. IEEE Signal Process. Mag. 29 (2012), 82–97.
4. Sebastiani, F., Machine learning in automated text categorization. ACM Comput. Surv. 34 (2002), 1–47.
5. Krizhevsky, A., et al. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Fereira, F., (eds.) Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25, 2012, Neural Information Processing Systems Foundation, 1097–1105.
6. Angermueller, C., et al. Deep learning for computational biology. Mol. Syst. Biol., 12, 2016, 878.
7. Byvatov, E., Schneider, G., Support vector machine applications in bioinformatics. Appl. Bioinform., 2, 2003, 67.
8. Libbrecht, M.W., Noble, W.S., Machine learning applications in genetics and genomics. Nat. Rev. Genet. 16 (2015), 321–332.
9. Lin, K., et al. Distinguishing positive selection from neutral evolution: boosting the performance of summary statistics. Genetics 187 (2011), 229–244.
10. Mailund, T., et al. Estimating divergence time and ancestral effective population size of Bornean and Sumatran orangutan subspecies using a coalescent hidden Markov model. PLoS Genet., 7, 2011, e1001319.
11. Kern, A.D., Haussler, D., A population genetic hidden Markov model for detecting genomic regions under selection. Mol. Biol. Evol. 27 (2010), 1673–1685.
12. Boitard, S., et al. Detecting selective sweeps: a new approach based on hidden Markov models. Genetics 181 (2009), 1567–1578.
13. Pavlidis, P., et al. Searching for footprints of positive selection in whole-genome SNP data from nonequilibrium populations. Genetics 185 (2010), 907–922.
14. Pybus, M., et al. Hierarchical boosting: a machine-learning framework to detect and classify hard selective sweeps in human populations. Bioinformatics 31 (2015), 3946–3952.
15. Ronen, R., et al. Learning natural selection from the site frequency spectrum. Genetics 195 (2013), 181–193.
16. Schrider, D.R., Kern, A.D., Inferring selective constraint from population genomic data suggests recent regulatory turnover in the human brain. Genome Biol. Evol. 7 (2015), 3511–3528.
17. Schrider, D.R., Kern, A.D., S/HIC: robust Identification of soft and hard sweeps using machine learning. PLoS Genet., 12, 2016, e1005928.
18. Sheehan, S., Song, Y.S., Deep learning for population genetic inference. PLoS Comput. Biol., 12, 2016, e1004845.
19. Amit, Y., Geman, D., Shape quantization and recognition with randomized trees. Neural Comput. 9 (1997), 1545–1588.
20. Chen, D., et al. Blessing of dimensionality: high-dimensional feature and its efficient compression for face verification. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, IEEE, 2013, 3025–3032.
21. Kotsiantis, S.B., et al. Supervised machine learning: a review of classification techniques. Artif. Intell. Rev. 26 (2006), 159–190.
22. Ghahramani, Z., et al. Unsupervised learning. Bousquet, O., (eds.) Advanced Lectures on Machine Learning, 2004, Springer, 72–112.
23. Novembre, J., et al. Genes mirror geography within Europe. Nature, 456, 2008, 98.
24. Rabiner, L.R., A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proc. IEEE 77 (1989), 257–286.
25. Felsenstein, J., Churchill, G.A., A hidden Markov model approach to variation among sites in rate of evolution. Mol. Biol. Evol. 13 (1996), 93–104.
26. Siepel, A., et al. Evolutionarily conserved elements in vertebrate, insect, worm, and yeast genomes. Genome Res. 15 (2005), 1034–1050.
27. Dutheil, J.Y., et al. Ancestral population genomics: the coalescent hidden Markov model approach. Genetics 183 (2009), 259–274.
28. Hobolth, A., et al. Genomic relationships and speciation times of human, chimpanzee, and gorilla inferred from a coalescent hidden Markov model. PLoS Genet., 3, 2007, e7.
29. Boitard, S., et al. Detecting selective sweeps from pooled next-generation sequencing samples. Mol. Biol. Evol. 29 (2012), 2177–2186.
30. Liang, P., Jordan, M.I., An asymptotic analysis of generative, discriminative, and pseudolikelihood estimators. Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Machine Learning, ACM, 2008, 584–591.
31. Anderson, J., et al. The more, the merrier: the blessing of dimensionality for learning large Gaussian mixtures. Proc. Mach. Learn. Res. 35 (2014), 1135–1164.
32. Bengio, Y., LeCun, Y., Scaling learning algorithms towards AI. Large Scale Kernel Mach. 34 (2007), 1–41.
33. Poggio, T., et al. Why and when can deep-but not shallow-networks avoid the curse of dimensionality: a review. Int. J. Autom. Comput. 14 (2017), 503–519.
34. Fay, J.C., Wu, C.-I., Hitchhiking under positive Darwinian selection. Genetics 155 (2000), 1405–1413.
35. Fu, Y.-X., Li, W.-H., Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations. Genetics 133 (1993), 693–709.
36. Fu, Y.-X., Statistical tests of neutrality of mutations against population growth, hitchhiking and background selection. Genetics 147 (1997), 915–925.
37. Kelly, J.K., A test of neutrality based on interlocus associations. Genetics 146 (1997), 1197–1206.
38. Kim, Y., Nielsen, R., Linkage disequilibrium as a signature of selective sweeps. Genetics 167 (2004), 1513–1524.
39. Tajima, F., Statistical method for testing the neutral mutation hypothesis by DNA polymorphism. Genetics 123 (1989), 585–595.
40. Voight, B.F., et al. A map of recent positive selection in the human genome. PLoS Biol., 4, 2006, e72.
41. Bengio, Y., Learning deep architectures for AI. Found. Trends Mach. Learn. 2 (2009), 1–127.
42. Beaumont, M.A., et al. Approximate Bayesian computation in population genetics. Genetics 162 (2002), 2025–2035.
43. Dunham, I., et al. An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. Nature 489 (2012), 57–74.
44. Altshuler, D.M., et al. An integrated map of genetic variation from 1,092 human genomes. Nature 491 (2012), 56–65.
45. Simonsen, K.L., et al. Properties of statistical tests of neutrality for DNA polymorphism data. Genetics 141 (1995), 413–429.
46. Meyer, K.A., et al. Differential gene expression in the human brain is associated with conserved, but not accelerated, noncoding sequences. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34 (2017), 1217–1229.
47. Pollard, K.S., et al. Forces shaping the fastest evolving regions in the human genome. PLoS Genet., 2, 2006, e168.
48. Maynard Smith, J., Haigh, J., The hitch-hiking effect of a favourable gene. Genet. Res. 23 (1974), 23–35.
49. Nielsen, R., et al. A scan for positively selected genes in the genomes of humans and chimpanzees. PLoS Biol., 3, 2005, e170.
50. Breiman, L., Random forests. Mach. Learn. 45 (2001), 5–32.
51. Geurts, P., et al. Extremely randomized trees. Mach. Learn. 63 (2006), 3–42.
52. Hermisson, J., Pennings, P.S., Soft sweeps molecular population genetics of adaptation from standing genetic variation. Genetics 169 (2005), 2335–2352.
53. Orr, H.A., Betancourt, A.J., Haldane's sieve and adaptation from the standing genetic variation. Genetics 157 (2001), 875–884.
54. Gutenkunst, R.N., et al. Inferring the joint demographic history of multiple populations from multidimensional SNP frequency data. PLoS Genet., 5, 2009, e1000695.
55. Hey, J., Nielsen, R., Integration within the Felsenstein equation for improved Markov chain Monte Carlo methods in population genetics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 104 (2007), 2785–2790.
56. Li, H., Durbin, R., Inference of human population history from individual whole-genome sequences. Nature 475 (2011), 493–496.
57. Liu, X., Fu, Y.-X., Exploring population size changes using SNP frequency spectra. Nat. Genet. 47 (2015), 555–559.
58. Sheehan, S., et al. Estimating variable effective population sizes from multiple genomes: a sequentially Markov conditional sampling distribution approach. Genetics 194 (2013), 647–662.
59. Beaumont, M.A., Approximate Bayesian computation in evolution and ecology. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 41 (2010), 379–406.
60. Aeschbacher, S., et al. A novel approach for choosing summary statistics in approximate Bayesian computation. Genetics 192 (2012), 1027–1047.
61. Jiang, B., et al. Learning summary statistic for approximate Bayesian computation via deep neural network. arXiv, 2015 Published online October 8 2015 https://arxiv.org/abs/1510.02175.
62. Blum, M.G., François, O., Non-linear regression models for approximate Bayesian computation. Stat. Comput. 20 (2010), 63–73.
63. Pudlo, P., et al. Reliable ABC model choice via random forests. Bioinformatics 32 (2016), 859–866.
64. Schrider, D., et al. Supervised machine learning reveals introgressed loci in the genomes of Drosophila simulans and D. sechellia. bioRxiv, 2017 Published online July 31, 2017 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2017/07/31/170670.
65. Adrian, A.B., et al. Predictive models of recombination rate variation across the Drosophila melanogaster genome. Genome Biol. Evol. 8 (2016), 2597–2612.
66. Gao, F., et al. New software for the fast estimation of population recombination rates (FastEPRR) in the genomic era. Genes Genomes Genet. 6 (2016), 1563–1571.
67. Lin, K., et al. A fast estimate for the population recombination rate based on regression. Genetics 194 (2013), 473–484.
68. McVean, G.A., et al. The fine-scale structure of recombination rate variation in the human genome. Science 304 (2004), 581–584.
69. Ewing, G.B., Jensen, J.D., The consequences of not accounting for background selection in demographic inference. Mol. Ecol. 25 (2016), 135–141.
70. Schrider, D.R., et al. Effects of linked selective sweeps on demographic inference and model selection. Genetics 204 (2016), 1207–1223.
71. Sermanet, P., et al. Overfeat: Integrated recognition, localization and detection using convolutional networks. arXiv, 2013 Published online December 21, 2013 https://arxiv.org/abs/1312.6229.
72. Graham, B., Fractional max-pooling. arXiv, 2014 Published online December 18, 2004 https://arxiv.org/abs/1412.6071.
73. Yu, C.-N.J., Joachims, T., Learning structural SVMs with latent variables. Proceedings of the 26th Annual International Conference on Machine Learning, ACM, 2009, 1169–1176.
74. Watterson, G., On the number of segregating sites in genetical models without recombination. Theor. Popul. Biol. 7 (1975), 256–276.
75. Hudson, R.R., Generating samples under a Wright–Fisher neutral model of genetic variation. Bioinformatics 18 (2002), 337–338.
76. Pedregosa, F., et al. Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12 (2011), 2825–2830.
77. Nei, M., Li, W.-H., Mathematical model for studying genetic variation in terms of restriction endonucleases. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 76 (1979), 5269–5273.
78. Garud, N.R., et al. Recent selective sweeps in North American Drosophila melanogaster show signatures of soft sweeps. PLoS Genet., 11, 2015, e1005004.
79. Messer, P.W., Petrov, D.A., Population genomics of rapid adaptation by soft selective sweeps. Trends Ecol. Evol. 28 (2013), 659–669.
80. Cortes, C., Vapnik, V., Support-vector networks. Mach. Learn. 20 (1995), 273–297.
81. Quinlan, J.R., Induction of decision trees. Mach. Learn. 1 (1986), 81–106.
82. Schapire, R.E., The strength of weak learnability. Mach. Learn. 5 (1990), 197–227.
83. Bishop, C.M., Neural Networks for Pattern Recognition. 1995, Oxford University Press.
84. LeCun, Y., et al. Deep learning. Nature 521 (2015), 436–444.
85. Schrider, D.R., et al. Soft shoulders ahead: spurious signatures of soft and partial selective sweeps result from linked hard sweeps. Genetics 200 (2015), 267–284.
86. Jensen, J.D., et al. Distinguishing between selective sweeps and demography using DNA polymorphism data. Genetics 170 (2005), 1401–1410.
87. Nielsen, R., et al. Genomic scans for selective sweeps using SNP data. Genome Res. 15 (2005), 1566–1575.
88. Schrider, D.R., Kern, A.D., Soft sweeps are the dominant mode of adaptation in the human genome. Mol. Biol. Evol. 34 (2017), 1863–1877.
89. Blum, M.G., et al. A comparative review of dimension reduction methods in approximate Bayesian computation. Stat. Sci. 28 (2013), 189–208.
90. Marin, J.-M., et al. ABC random forests for Bayesian parameter inference. arXiv, 2016 Published online May 18, 2016 https://arxiv.org/abs/1605.05537.