G3 Genes Genomes GeneticsEvolutionary BiologyPeer-reviewed journal article
Estimating allele frequencies, ancestry proportions and genotype likelihoods in the presence of mapping bias
Abstract
Population genomic analyses rely on an accurate and unbiased characterization of the genetic composition of the studied population. For short-read, high-throughput sequencing data, mapping sequencing reads to a linear reference genome can bias population genetic inference due to mismatches in reads carrying non-reference alleles. In this study, we investigate the impact of mapping bias on allele frequency estimates from pseudohaploid data, commonly used in ultra-low coverage ancient DNA sequencing. To mitigate mapping bias, we propose an empirical adjustment to genotype likelihoods. Using data from the 1000 Genomes Project, we find that our new method improves allele frequency estimation. To test a downstream application, we simulate ancient DNA data with realistic post-mortem damage to compare widely used methods for estimating ancestry proportions under different scenarios, including reference genome selection, population divergence, and sequencing depth. Our findings reveal that mapping bias can lead to differences in estimated admixture proportion of up to 4% depending on the reference population. However, the choice of method has a much stronger impact, with some methods showing differences of 10%. qpAdm appears to perform best at estimating simulated ancestry proportions, but it is sensitive to mapping bias and its applicability may vary across species due to its requirement for additional populations beyond the sources and target population. Our adjusted genotype likelihood approach largely mitigates the effect of mapping bias on genome-wide ancestry estimates from genotype likelihood-based tools. However, it cannot account for the bias introduced by the method itself or the noise in individual site allele frequency estimates due to low sequencing depth. Overall, our study provides valuable insights for obtaining more precise estimates of allele frequencies and ancestry proportions in empirical studies.
- organism: human
- assay: whole-genome sequencing
- research focus: variant calling
- research focus: differential expression
- research focus: gene regulatory network inference
- research focus: polygenic risk
- approach: statistical model
- Citations
- 8
- FWCI
- 2.14
- Field percentile
- top 12%
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- The presence and impact of reference bias on population genomic studies of prehistoric human populations
Torsten Günther, Carl Nettelblad·PLoS GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Jul 26, 2019
- Mapping bias overestimates reference allele frequencies at the HLA genes in the 1000 Genomes Project phase I data
Debora Yoshihara Caldeira Brandt, Vitor Rezende da Costa Aguiar, … Diogo Meyer·G3 Genes|Genomes|GeneticsPeer-reviewed·May 1, 2015
- An empirical evaluation of genotype imputation of ancient DNA
Kristiina Ausmees, Federico Sánchez‐Quinto, … Carl Nettelblad·G3 Genes Genomes GeneticsPeer-reviewed·Apr 28, 2022
- Adjustment for SNPs instead of demographic and clinical covariates in GWAS
Kristiina Ausmees, Federico Sánchez‐Quinto, … Carl Nettelblad·bioRxiv·Dec 22, 2021
- LoGicAl: Local ancestry and genotype calling uncertainty-aware ancestry-specific allele frequency estimation from admixed samples
Jiongming Wang, Sebastian Zöllner·BioinformaticsPeer-reviewed·Oct 1, 2026
- Modeling biases from low-pass genome sequencing to enable accurate population genetic inferences
Emanuel Masiero da Fonseca, Linh N. Tran, … Ryan N. Gutenkunst·Molecular Biology and EvolutionPeer-reviewed·Jan 1, 2025