On minimizing assignment errors and the trade-off between false positives and negatives in parentage analysis
KAUST DepartmentRed Sea Research Center (RSRC)
Biological and Environmental Sciences and Engineering (BESE) Division
Marine Science Program
Reef Ecology Lab
MetadataShow full item record
AbstractGenetic parentage analyses provide a practical means with which to identify parent-offspring relationships in the wild. In Harrison et al.'s study (2013a), we compare three methods of parentage analysis and showed that the number and diversity of microsatellite loci were the most important factors defining the accuracy of assignments. Our simulations revealed that an exclusion-Bayes theorem method was more susceptible to false-positive and false-negative assignments than other methods tested. Here, we analyse and discuss the trade-off between type I and type II errors in parentage analyses. We show that controlling for false-positive assignments, without reporting type II errors, can be misleading. Our findings illustrate the need to estimate and report both the rate of false-positive and false-negative assignments in parentage analyses. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
- Bayesian parentage analysis reliably controls the number of false assignments in natural populations.
- Authors: Christie MR
- Issue date: 2013 Dec
- Relative accuracy of three common methods of parentage analysis in natural populations.
- Authors: Harrison HB, Saenz-Agudelo P, Planes S, Jones GP, Berumen ML
- Issue date: 2013 Feb
- Effects of genotyping errors on parentage exclusion analysis.
- Authors: Wang J
- Issue date: 2010 Nov
- Bayesian parentage analysis with systematic accountability of genotyping error, missing data and false matching.
- Authors: Christie MR, Tennessen JA, Blouin MS
- Issue date: 2013 Mar 15
- Unbiased estimation of relative reproductive success of different groups: evaluation and correction of bias caused by parentage assignment errors.
- Authors: Araki H, Blouin MS
- Issue date: 2005 Nov