Inferences about Linkage Disequilibrium
Abstract
Existing theory for inferences about linkage disequilibrium is restricted to a measure defined on gametic frequencies. Unless gametic frequencies are directly observable, they are inferred from genotypic frequencies under the assumption of random union of gametes. Primary emphasis in this paper is given to genotypic data, and disequilibrium coefficients are defined for all subsets of two or more of the four genes, two at each of two loci, carried by an individual. Linkage disequilibrium coefficients are defined for genes within and between gametes, and methods of estimating and testing these coefficients are given for gametic data. For genotypic data, when coupling and repulsion double heterozygotes cannot be distinguished. Burrows' composite measure of linkage disequilibrium is discussed. In particular, the estimate for this measure and hypothesis tests based on it are compared to the usual maximum likelihood estimate of gametic linkage disequilibrium, and corresponding likelihood ratio or contingency chi-square tests. General use of the composite measure, whether or not random union of gametes is an appropriate assumption, is recommended. Attention is given to small samples, where the non-normality of gene frequencies will have greatest effect on methods of inference based on normal theory. Even tools such as Fisher's z-transformation for the correlation of gene frequencies are found to perform quite satisfactorily.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The lack of information about haplotype phase weakens the signal of nonrandom association sufficiently that quantifying LD in genotypic data is not often taken.
“The extent of LD in genotypic data2,9 can be quantified, but the lack of information about the haplotype phase weakens the signal of nonrandom association sufficiently that this approach is not often taken.”
From Linkage disequilibrium--understanding the evolutionary past and mapping the medical future. (2008) · cites this paper as [9]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Linkage disequilibrium--understanding the evolutionary past and mapping the medical future.
Slatkin, M. (2008) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg2361 · Cited by 1,614 · see citing works
Haplotype-based inference of recent effective population size in modern and ancient DNA samples
Fournier, R., Tsangalidou, Z., Reich, D., & Palamara, P. F. (2023) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-023-43522-6 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
- Authors
- Weir, B. S.
- Affiliations
- North Carolina State University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Weir, B. S.
- ORCID
- Weir, B. S.
- Venue
- Biometrics
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1979-03
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 235
- ISSN
- 0006-341X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2001583270
- Cited by
- 516
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 26
- FWCI
- 2.13
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Biometrics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Mapping and Diversity in Plants and Animals
- Keywords
- linkage disequilibrium, genotype frequency, double heterozygotes, maximum likelihood estimation, hypothesis testing, small sample inference, Fisher's z-transformation, allele frequency, likelihood ratio test
- MeSH terms
- Gene Frequency, Genetics, Population, Genotype, Humans, Genetic Linkage, Statistics as Topic
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