2011Journal of EpidemiologyOpen access

Genetic Heterogeneity of Self-Reported Ancestry Groups in an Admixed Brazilian Population

Tulio Cesar de Lima Lins, R. G. Vieira, Breno Silva de Abreu, Paulo Gentil, Ricardo Moreno Lima, Ricardo J Oliveira, Rinaldo Wellerson Pereira

Open full text 59 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Population stratification is the main source of spurious results and poor reproducibility in genetic association findings. Population heterogeneity can be controlled for by grouping individuals in ethnic clusters; however, in admixed populations, there is evidence that such proxies do not provide efficient stratification control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation of self-reported with genetic ancestry and the statistical risk of grouping an admixed sample based on self-reported ancestry. METHODS: A questionnaire that included an item on self-reported ancestry was completed by 189 female volunteers from an admixed Brazilian population. Individual genetic ancestry was then determined by genotyping ancestry informative markers. RESULTS: Self-reported ancestry was classified as white, intermediate, and black. The mean difference among self-reported groups was significant for European and African, but not Amerindian, genetic ancestry. Pairwise fixation index analysis revealed a significant difference among groups. However, the increase in the chance of type 1 error was estimated to be 14%. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reporting of ancestry was not an appropriate methodology to cluster groups in a Brazilian population, due to high variance at the individual level. Ancestry informative markers are more useful for quantitative measurement of biological ancestry.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

BACKGROUND: Population stratification is the main source of spurious results and poor reproducibility in genetic association findings. Population heterogeneity can be controlled for by grouping individuals in ethnic clusters; however, in admixed populations, there is evidence that such proxies do not provide efficient stratification control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation of self-reported with genetic ancestry and the statistical risk of grouping an admixed sample based on self-reported ancestry. METHODS: A questionnaire that included an item on self-reported ancestry was completed by 189 female volunteers from an admixed Brazilian population. Individual genetic ancestry was then determined by genotyping ancestry informative markers. RESULTS: Self-reported ancestry was classified as white, intermediate, and black. The mean difference among self-reported groups was significant for European and African, but not Amerindian, genetic ancestry. Pairwise fixation index analysis revealed a significant difference among groups. However, the increase in the chance of type 1 error was estimated to be 14%. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reporting of ancestry was not an appropriate methodology to cluster groups in a Brazilian population, due to high variance at the individual level. Ancestry informative markers are more useful for quantitative measurement of biological ancestry.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 59 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

BACKGROUND: Population stratification is the main source of spurious results and poor reproducibility in genetic association findings. Population heterogeneity can be controlled for by grouping individuals in ethnic clusters; however, in admixed populations, there is evidence that such proxies do not provide efficient stratification control. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relation of self-reported with genetic ancestry and the statistical risk of grouping an admixed sample based on self-reported ancestry. METHODS: A questionnaire that included an item on self-reported ancestry was completed by 189 female volunteers from an admixed Brazilian population. Individual genetic ancestry was then determined by genotyping ancestry informative markers. RESULTS: Self-reported ancestry was classified as white, intermediate, and black. The mean difference among self-reported groups was significant for European and African, but not Amerindian, genetic ancestry. Pairwise fixation index analysis revealed a significant difference among groups. However, the increase in the chance of type 1 error was estimated to be 14%. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reporting of ancestry was not an appropriate methodology to cluster groups in a Brazilian population, due to high variance at the individual level. Ancestry informative markers are more useful for quantitative measurement of biological ancestry.

Key concepts: Medicine, Genetic genealogy, Population, Genetics, Demography, Evolutionary biology, Environmental health, Biology

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Genetic Heterogeneity of Self-Reported Ancestry Groups in an Admixed Brazilian Population — Research Paper | ScholarLens