Biased Estimation of the Recombination Fraction Using Half-Sib Families and Informative Offspring

Corresponding author: L. Gomez-Raya, Area de Produccio Animal, Av. Alcalde Rovira Roure, 177, 25198 Lleida, Spain., luis.gomez{at}irta.es (E-mail)

Communicating editor: J. B. WALSH

A maximum-likelihood method to estimate the recombination fraction and its sampling variance using informative and noninformative half-sib offspring is derived. Estimates of the recombination fraction are biased up to 20 cM when noninformative offspring are discarded. In certain scenarios, the sampling variance can be increased or reduced up to fivefold due to the bias in estimating the recombination fraction and the LOD score can be reduced up to 5 units when discarding noninformative offspring. Comparison of the estimates of recombination fraction, map distance, and LOD score when constructing a genetic map with 251 two-point linkage analyses and six families of Norwegian cattle was carried out to evaluate the implications of discarding noninformative offspring in practical situations. The average discrepancies in absolute value (average difference when using and neglecting noninformative offspring) were 0.0146, 1.64 cM, and 2.61 for the recombination fraction, map distance, and the LOD score, respectively. A method for simultaneous estimation of allele frequencies in the dam population and a transmission disequilibrium parameter is proposed. This method might account for the bias in estimating allele frequencies in the dam population when the half-sib offspring is selected for production traits.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. Gomez-Raya, H. G. Olsen, F. Lingaas, H. Klungland, D. I. Vage, I. Olsaker, S. B. Talle, M. Aasland, and S. Lien The Use of Genetic Markers to Measure Genomic Response to Selection in Livestock Genetics, November 1, 2002; 162(3): 1381 - 1388. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y. Da, J. Garbe, N. London, and J. Xu Linkage analysis using direct and indirect counting and relative efficiencies for codominant and dominant loci J Anim Sci, October 1, 2002; 80(10): 2528 - 2539. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]