Skip to main content
NCBI home page
American Journal of Human Genetics logoLink to American Journal of Human Genetics
. 1995 Jun;56(6):1468–1476.

Proportion of genome shared identical by descent by relatives: concept, computation, and applications.

S W Guo 1
PMCID: PMC1801111  PMID: 7762570

Abstract

One widely used measure of genetic similarity for pairs of relatives is gene identity-by-descent (IBD) sharing. Genes that are copies of a single gene in a common ancestor of the individuals who now carry them are said to be IBD. One obvious extension of the IBD concept is IBD gene(s) shared by more than two individuals. In this paper, I further extend the gene IBD concept to the proportion of genomes shared IBD by every member of a group of relatives. Genome may refer either to the entire autosomal genome or to one or more chromosomal segments or regions with known lengths. Consideration of a genome instead of one or two loci has several advantages. I present a model to describe the crossover process, based on the work of K. P. Donnelly. On the basis of this model, I give a mathematical definition of the proportion of genome shared IBD by relatives, or IBDP for short. Since the distribution of the IBDP is in general very difficult to determine, and since in most applications the mean and variance of the IBDP will suffice, I then provide a method for computing the first two moments of the IBDP. Applications to assessing gene survival, to genetic resemblance between two relatives, and to gene mapping are illustrated with examples. Finally, I discuss the utility of the IBDP in other areas.

Full text

PDF
1468

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Amos C. I., Dawson D. V., Elston R. C. The probabilistic determination of identity-by-descent sharing for pairs of relatives from pedigrees. Am J Hum Genet. 1990 Nov;47(5):842–853. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Boehnke M. Limits of resolution of genetic linkage studies: implications for the positional cloning of human disease genes. Am J Hum Genet. 1994 Aug;55(2):379–390. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cockerham C. C. Higher order probability functions of identity of allelles by descent. Genetics. 1971 Oct;69(2):235–246. doi: 10.1093/genetics/69.2.235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Donnelly K. P. The probability that related individuals share some section of genome identical by descent. Theor Popul Biol. 1983 Feb;23(1):34–63. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(83)90004-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Feingold E., Brown P. O., Siegmund D. Gaussian models for genetic linkage analysis using complete high-resolution maps of identity by descent. Am J Hum Genet. 1993 Jul;53(1):234–251. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Foss E., Lande R., Stahl F. W., Steinberg C. M. Chiasma interference as a function of genetic distance. Genetics. 1993 Mar;133(3):681–691. doi: 10.1093/genetics/133.3.681. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Franklin I. R. The distribution of the proportion of the genome which is homozygous by descent in inbred individuals. Theor Popul Biol. 1977 Feb;11(1):60–80. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(77)90007-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Goldgar D. E. Multipoint analysis of human quantitative genetic variation. Am J Hum Genet. 1990 Dec;47(6):957–967. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Guo S. W. Computation of identity-by-descent proportions shared by two siblings. Am J Hum Genet. 1994 Jun;54(6):1104–1109. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Jacquard A. Genetic information given by a relative. Biometrics. 1972 Dec;28(4):1101–1114. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Karigl G. A recursive algorithm for the calculation of identity coefficients. Ann Hum Genet. 1981 Jul;45(Pt 3):299–305. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1981.tb00341.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Lander E. S. Finding similarities and differences among genomes. Nat Genet. 1993 May;4(1):5–6. doi: 10.1038/ng0593-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Rasmuson M. Variation in genetic identity within kinships. Heredity (Edinb) 1993 Mar;70(Pt 3):266–268. doi: 10.1038/hdy.1993.38. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Risch N., Lange K. Application of a recombination model in calculating the variance of sib pair genetic identity. Ann Hum Genet. 1979 Oct;43(2):177–186. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-1809.1979.tb02010.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Suarez B. K., Reich T., Fishman P. M. Variability in sib pair genetic identity. Hum Hered. 1979;29(1):37–41. doi: 10.1159/000153013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Thompson E. A. Gene identities and multiple relationships. Biometrics. 1974 Dec;30(4):667–680. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Weeks D. E., Lange K. The affected-pedigree-member method of linkage analysis. Am J Hum Genet. 1988 Feb;42(2):315–326. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Weeks D. E., Ott J., Lathrop G. M. Detection of genetic interference: simulation studies and mouse data. Genetics. 1994 Mar;136(3):1217–1226. doi: 10.1093/genetics/136.3.1217. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Whittemore A. S., Halpern J. A class of tests for linkage using affected pedigree members. Biometrics. 1994 Mar;50(1):118–127. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Zhao H., Speed T. P., McPeek M. S. Statistical analysis of crossover interference using the chi-square model. Genetics. 1995 Feb;139(2):1045–1056. doi: 10.1093/genetics/139.2.1045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from American Journal of Human Genetics are provided here courtesy of American Society of Human Genetics

RESOURCES