A Genome-Scan Method to Identify Selected Loci Appropriate for Both Dominant and Codominant Markers: A Bayesian Perspective

Abstract

Identifying loci under natural selection from genomic surveys is of great interest in different research areas. Commonly used methods to separate neutral effects from adaptive effects are based on locusspecific population differentiation coefficients to identify outliers. Here we extend such an approach to estimate directly the probability that each locus is subject to selection using a Bayesian method. We also extend it to allow the use of dominant markers like AFLPs. It has been shown that this model is robust to complex demographic scenarios for neutral genetic differentiation. Here we show that the inclusion of isolated populations that underwent a strong bottleneck can lead to a high rate of false positives. Nevertheless, we demonstrate that it is possible to avoid them by carefully choosing the populations that should be included in the analysis. We analyze two previously published data sets: a human data set of codominant markers and a Littorina saxatilis data set of dominant markers. We also perform a detailed sensitivity study to compare the power of the method using amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP), SNP, and microsatellite markers. The method has been implemented in a new software available at our website

Discovering variation of secondary metabolite diversity and its relationship with disease resistance in Cornus florida L.

“…We used genotype by sequencing (GBS; Peterson et al., 2012) of two Illumina Hiseq libraries, de novo assembly into 90‐bp GBS tags with STACKS (Catchen, Amores, Hohenlohe, Cresko, & Postlethwait, 2011), latent factor mixed modeling [a genotype–environment association (GEA) method; Frichot, Schoville, Bouchard, & François, 2013], and two F ST outlier methods (Excoffier, Hofer, & Foll, 2009; Foll & Gaggiotti, 2008) to classify putatively neutral SNPS and SNPs exhibiting varying support for being under selection (Pais et al., 2016). Putatively neutral reference SNPs were used to calculate marker‐based inbreeding coefficients ( F ; Keller, Visscher, & Goddard, 2011) and identity‐by‐state matrices using PLINK (Purcell et al., 2007).…”

A genome scan for selection signatures comparing farmed Atlantic salmon with two wild populations: Testing colocalization among outlier markers, candidate genes, and quantitative trait loci for production traits

“…Methods of detecting F ST outliers resulting from “soft sweeps” suitable for low‐density SNP chip datasets include (i) FDIST2, which compares the F ST observed for a locus to the F ST expected under neutrality relative to its observed heterozygosity assuming an “n‐island” model where the effective population size of all population is constant as is the pairwise population migration rate (Antao, Lopes, Lopes, Beja‐Pereira, & Luikart, 2008; Beaumont & Nichols, 1996), (ii) Arlequin v.3.5, which implements FDIST2 methodology with the addition of a hierarchical island option that assumes two different constant migration rates with the lower rate among regional groups of populations and the higher rate among populations within the same region (Excoffier et al., 2009), and (iii) BayeScan, which separately estimates the posterior probability that each locus is under selection without assuming that all effective population sizes and migration rates are equal (Beaumont & Balding, 2004; Foll & Gaggiotti, 2008). In this study, Arlequin 3.5 and BayeScan 2.1 were chosen for the outlier analysis to be a good combination to reduce type I (false positive) and type II (false negative) error rates, which have been evaluated using simulation (Lotterhos & Whitlock, 2014; Narum & Hess, 2011; Vilas, Perez‐Figueroa, & Caballero, 2012).…”

Landscape genomic approach to detect selection signatures in locally adapted Brazilian swine genetic groups

“…BayeScan software V 2.1 (Foll & Gaggiotti, 2008) used a Bayesian approach via Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC), assuming a prior Dirichlet distribution of alleles within populations and a hierarchical Bayesian model. The program calculates posterior odds, from the posterior probability of the models, with and without selection on a locus, using the proportion of loci with a strong increase in F ST relative to other loci among the MCMC outputs of its simulations (Beaumont & Balding, 2004).…”