Cited by 10Genetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and AnimalsBioinformatics and Genomic Networks

A framework for modeling epistatic interaction

Blumenthal, David B, Baumbach, Jan, Hoffmann, Markus, Kacprowski, Tim, List, Markus·2021·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: Recently, various tools for detecting single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) involved in epistasis have been developed. However, no studies evaluate the employed statistical epistasis models such as the χ2-test or quadratic regression independently of the tools that use them. Such an independent evaluation is crucial for developing improved epistasis detection tools, for it allows to decide if a tool’s performance should be attributed to the epistasis model or to the optimization strategy run on top of it. Results: We present a protocol for evaluating epistasis models independently of the tools they are used in and generalize existing models designed for dichotomous phenotypes to the categorical and quantitative case. In addition, we propose a new model which scores candidate SNP sets by computing maximum likelihood distributions for the observed phenotypes in the cells of their penetrance tables. Extensive experiments show that the proposed maximum likelihood model outperforms three widely used epistasis models in most cases. The experiments also provide valuable insights into the properties of existing models, for instance, that quadratic regression perform particularly well on instances with quantitative phenotypes. Availability and implementation: The evaluation protocol and all compared models are implemented in C++ and are supported under Linux and macOS. They are available at https://github.com/baumbachlab/genepiseeker/, along with test datasets and scripts to reproduce the experiments. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btaa990

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blumenthal, D. B., Baumbach, J., Hoffmann, M., Kacprowski, T., & List, M.
Affiliations
Technical University of Munich (DE)
Corresponding author
Blumenthal, David B
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2020-11-30
Volume
37
Issue
12
Pages
1708-1716
ISSN
  • 1367-4803 (ISSN-L)
  • 1367-4811
OpenAlex
W3109840083
Cited by
10
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2
FWCI
0.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Bioinformatics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • European Research Council
  • European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (777111)
  • German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (01ZX1908A)
  • German Science Foundation
  • Collaborative Research Center (SFB1371)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Bioinformatics and Genomic Networks
Keywords
epistasis, single nucleotide polymorphisms, epistasis detection, maximum likelihood model, quantitative phenotypes, quadratic regression, chi-square test, model evaluation
MeSH terms
Epistasis, Genetic, Phenotype, Probability, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review