Comprehensive Assessment of Genotype Imputation Performance
Shuo Shi, Na Yuan, Ming Yang, Zhenglin Du, Jinyue Wang, Xin Sheng, Jiayan Wu, Jingfa Xiao
Abstract
Shuo Shi, Na Yuan, Ming Yang, Zhenglin Du, Jinyue Wang, Xin Sheng, Jiayan Wu, Jingfa Xiao
Abstract
Genotype imputation is a process of estimating missing ge-notypes from the haplotype or genotype reference panel. It can effectively boost the power of detecting single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genome-wide association studies, integrate multi-studies for meta-analysis, and be applied in fine-mapping studies. The performance of genotype imputation is affected by many factors, including software, reference selection, sample size, and SNP density/sequencing coverage. A systematical evaluation of the imputation performance of current popular software will benefit future studies. Here, we evaluate imputation performances of Beagle4.1, IMPUTE2, MACH+Minimac3, and SHAPEIT2+ IM-PUTE2 using test samples of East Asian ancestry and references of the 1000 Genomes Project. The result indicated the accuracy of IMPUTE2 (99.18%) is slightly higher than that of the others (Beagle4.1: 98.94%, MACH+Minimac3: 98.51%, and SHAPEIT2+IMPUTE2: 99.08%). To achieve good and stable imputation quality, the minimum requirement of SNP density needs to be > 200/Mb. The imputation accuracies of IMPUTE2 and Beagle4.1 were under the minor influence of the study sample size. The contribution extent of reference to genotype imputation performance relied on software selection. We assessed the imputation performance on SNPs generated by next-generation whole genome sequencing and found that SNP sets detected by sequencing with 15× depth could be mostly got by imputing from the haplotype reference panel of the 1000 Genomes Project based on SNP data detected by sequencing with 4× depth. All of the imputation software had a weaker performance in low minor allele frequency SNP regions because of the bias of reference or software. In the future, more comprehensive reference panels or new algorithm developments may rise up to this challenge.
OpenAlex reports 82 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Genotype imputation is a process of estimating missing ge-notypes from the haplotype or genotype reference panel. It can effectively boost the power of detecting single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genome-wide association studies, integrate multi-studies for meta-analysis, and be applied in fine-mapping studies. The performance of genotype imputation is affected by many factors, including software, reference selection, sample size, and SNP density/sequencing coverage. A systematical evaluation of the imputation performance of current popular software will benefit future studies. Here, we evaluate imputation performances of Beagle4.1, IMPUTE2, MACH+Minimac3, and SHAPEIT2+ IM-PUTE2 using test samples of East Asian ancestry and references of the 1000 Genomes Project. The result indicated the accuracy of IMPUTE2 (99.18%) is slightly higher than that of the others (Beagle4.1: 98.94%, MACH+Minimac3: 98.51%, and SHAPEIT2+IMPUTE2: 99.08%). To achieve good and stable imputation quality, the minimum requirement of SNP density needs to be > 200/Mb. The imputation accuracies of IMPUTE2 and Beagle4.1 were under the minor influence of the study sample size. The contribution extent of reference to genotype imputation performance relied on software selection. We assessed the imputation performance on SNPs generated by next-generation whole genome sequencing and found that SNP sets detected by sequencing with 15× depth could be mostly got by imputing from the haplotype reference panel of the 1000 Genomes Project based on SNP data detected by sequencing with 4× depth. All of the imputation software had a weaker performance in low minor allele frequency SNP regions because of the bias of reference or software. In the future, more comprehensive reference panels or new algorithm developments may rise up to this challenge.
Key concepts: Imputation (statistics), Minor allele frequency, Single-nucleotide polymorphism, 1000 Genomes Project, SNP, Biology, Genome-wide association study, Genetic association