Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Apr 1.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Rev Genet. 2011 Sep 16;12(10):703–714. doi: 10.1038/nrg3054

Figure 4. Accuracy of statistical phasing of cryptic relatives when relationship is not explicitly accounted for.

Figure 4

The same sets of individuals were phased as in Figure 2, with the addition of one parent of each HapMap CEU child (“Cryptic pairs” results) or both parents (“Cryptic trios” results). Phasing was performed with BEAGLE assuming all samples are unrelated. The “Unrelated” results are identical to those for BEAGLE in Figure 2A, and do not include any of the parents. It can be seen that adding relatives to the phase estimation greatly improves phase accuracy even when treating the individuals as unrelated. The phase accuracy would be significantly further improved by using the known relationships during the phase estimation.