22 Zygosity Diagnosis in the Absence of Genotypic Data An Approach Using Latent Class Analy.pdf

下载文档

4
0
约2.65万字
约 5页
2017-04-09 发布于江苏
举报
版权申诉
保障服务

22 Zygosity Diagnosis in the Absence of Genotypic Data An Approach Using Latent Class Analy.pdf

1、本文档共5页，可阅读全部内容。
2、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。
3、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
4、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。

22 Zygosity Diagnosis in the Absence of Genotypic Data An Approach Using Latent Class Analy

22 Twin Research Volume 6 Number 1 pp. 22± 26 For zygosity diagnosis in the absence of genotypic data, or inthe recruitment phase of a twin study where only single twins from same-sex pairs are being screened, or to provide a test for sample duplication leading to the false identification of a dizygotic pair as monozygotic, the appropriate analysis of respondents’ answers to questions about zygosity is critical. Using data from a young adult Australian twin cohort (N = 2094 complete pairs and 519 singleton twins from same-sex pairs with complete responses to all zygosity items), we show that application of latent class analysis (LCA), fitting a 2-class model, yields results that show good concordance with tradi- t ional methods of zygosity diagnosis, but with certa in important advantages. These include the ability, in many cases, to assign zygosity with specified probability on the basis of responses of a single informant (advantageous when one zygosity type is being oversampled); and the ability to quantify the probability of misassignment of zygosity, allowing prioritiza- tion of cases for genotyping as well as identification of cases of probable laboratory error. Out of 242 twins (from 121 like- sex pairs) where genotypic data were available for zygosity confirmation, only a single case was identified of incorrect zygosity assignment by the latent class algorithm. Zygosity assignment for that single case was identified by the LCA as uncertain (probability of being a monozygotic twin only 76%), and the co-twin’s responses clearly identified the pair as dizy- gotic (probability of being dizygotic 100%). In the absence of genotypic data, or as a safeguard against sample duplication, application of LCA for zygosity assignment or confirmation is strongly recommended. Historically, early twin studies relied upon questionnaire- based assessment of twin pair zygosity, using questions about physical similarity and confusion in childhood, with typing of genetic markers