Abstract
Pedigree testing, using genetic markers, may be undertaken for a variety of situations, of which the classical paternity testing is only one. This has not always been made clear in the literature. Exclusion probabilities associated with various testing situations, including the use of autosomal or X-linked codominant marker systems with any number of alleles, are presented. These formulae can be used to determine the appropriate exclusion probability for the situation being investigated. One such situation is where sire groups of progeny are to be verified without knowledge of the dams' genotypes, in which case the classical paternity exclusion probability is too high, and if used may result in an optimistic declaration about the progeny that have not been excluded. On the other hand, if mating pairs are known then incorrect progeny can be excluded at a higher rate than suggested by paternity exclusion calculations. The formulae also assist in determining the usefulness of X-linked markers, particularly if the pedigree checks involve progeny of only one sex. A system of notation that is useful for the algebraic manipulation of genetic probabilities, including exclusion probabilities as presented here, is also given.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Alexander G, Stevens D, Mottershead B (1983) Problems in the accurate recording of lambing data. Aust J Exp Agric Anim Husb 23:361–368
Barendse W, Armitage SM, Kossarek LM, Shalom A, Kirkpatrick BW, Ryan AM, Clayton D, Li L, Neibergs HL, Zhang N, Grosse WM, Weiss J, Creighton P, McCarthy F, Ron M, Teale AJ, Fries R, McGraw RA, Moore SS, Georges M, Soller M, Womack JE, Hetzel DJS (1994) A genetic linkage map of the boving genome. Nat Genet 6:227–235
Bishop MD, Kappes SM, Keele JW, Stone RT, Sunden SLF, Hawkins GA, Toldo SS, Fries R, Grosz MD, Yoo JY, Beattie CW (1994) A genetic linkage map for cattle. Genetics 136:619–639
Botstein D, White RL, Skolnick M, Davis RW (1980) Construction of a genetic linkage map in man using restriction fragment length polymorphism. Am J Hum Genet 32:314–331
Boyd WC (1954) Tables and nomograms for calculating chances of excluding paternity. Am J Hum Genet 6:426–433
Bucher KD, Elston RC (1975) Estimation of nonpaternity for X-linked trait. Am J Hum Genet 27:689–690
Bulmer MG (1980) The mathematical theory of quantitative genetics. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Burt DW, Bumstead N, Bitgood JJ, Ponce De Leon FA, Crittenden LB (1995) Chicken genome mapping: a new era in avian genetics. Trends Genet 11:190–194
Chakraborty R, Schull WJ (1976) A note on the distribution of the number of exclusions to be expected in paternity testing. Am J Hum Genet 28:615–618
Chakraborty R, Shaw M, Schull WJ (1974) Exclusion of paternity: the current state of the art. Am J Hum Genet 26:477–488
Chakraborty R, Meagher TR, Smouse PE (1988) Parentage analysis with genetic markers in natural populations. I. The expected proportion of offspring with unambiguous paternity. Genetics 118:527–536
Crawford AM, Tate ML, McEwan JC, Kumaramanickavel G, McEwan KM, Dodds KG, Swarbrick PA, Thompson P (1993) How reliable are sheep pedigrees? Proc N Z Soc Anim Prod 53:363–366
Crawford AM, Dodds KG, Ede AJ, Pierson CA, Montgomery GW, Garmonsway HG, Beattie AE, Davies K, Maddox JF, Kappes SW, Stone RT, Nguyen TC, Penty JM, Lord EA, Broom JE, Buitkamp J, Schwaiger W, Epplen JT, Matthew P, Matthews ME, Hulme DJ, Beh KJ, McGraw RA, Beattie CW (1995) An autosomal genetic linkage map of the sheep genome. Genetics 140:703–724
Elston RC, Stewart J (1971) A general model for the genetic analysis of pedigree data. Hum Hered 21:523–542
Geldermann H, Pieper U, Weber WE (1986) Effect of misidentification on the estimation of breeding value and heritability in cattle. J Anim Sci 63:1759–1768
Goodard ME (1992) A mixed model for analyses of data on multiple genetic markers. Theor Appl Genet 83:878–886
Jamieson A (1956) The genetics of transferrins in cattle. Heredity 20:419–441
Jamieson A (1994) The effectiveness of using co-dominant polymorphic allelic series for (1) checking pedigrees and (2) distinguishing full-sib pair members. Anim Genet 25S1:37–44
Kashi Y, Lipkin E, Darvasi A, Nave A, Gruenbaum Y, Beckmann JS, Soller M (1990) Parentage identification in bovine using “Deoxyribonucleic Acid Fingerprints”. J Dairy Sci 73:3306–3311
Kinghorn BP, Kennedy BW, Smith C (1993) A method of screening for genes of major effect. Genetics 134:351–360
MacCluer JW, Schull WJ (1963) On the estimation of the frequency of nonpaternity. Am J Hum Genet 15:191–202
Marklund S, Ellegren H, Eriksson S, Sandberg K, Andersson L (1994) Parentage testing and linkage analysis in the horse using a set of highly polymorphic microsatellites. Anim Genet 25:19–23
McCoubrey CM, Sales DI, Archibald AL (1983) Testing genetic models in populations which contain pedigree errors. Anim Blood Groups Biochem Genet 14:257–268
Meagher TR, Thompson EA (1986) The relationship between single parent and parent pair genetic likelihoods in genealogy reconstruction. Theor Pop Biol 29:87–106
Pemberton JM, Slate J, Bancroft DR, Barrett JA (1955) Nonamplifying alleles at microsatellite loci: a caution for parentage and population studies. Mol Ecol 4:249–252
Pépin L, Amigues Y, Lépingle A, Berthier JL, Bensaid A, Vaiman D (1995) Sequence conservation of microsatellites between Bos taurus (cattle), Capra hircus (goat) and related species. Examples of use in parentage testing and phylogeny analysis. Heredity 74: 53–61
Rohrer GA, Alexander LJ, Keele JW, Smith TP, Beattie CW (1994) A microsatellite linkage map of the porcine genome. Genetics 136: 231–245
Selvin S (1980) Probability of nonpaternity determined by multiple allele codominant systems. Am J Hum Genet 32:276–278
Tate ML, Dodds KG, Thomas KJ, McEwan KM (1992) Genetic polymorphism of plasminogen and vitamin D binding protein in red deer, (Cervus elaphus L.). Anim Genet 23:303–313
Thompson EA (1986) Pedigree analysis in human genetics. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore
Usha AP, Simpson SP, Williams JL (1995) Probability of random sire exclusion using microsatellite markers for parentage verification. Anim Genet 26:155–161
Van Vleck LD (1970) Misidentification and sire evaluation. J Dairy Sci 53:1697–1702
Weir BS (1990) Genetic data analysis. Sinauer, Sunderland, Mass.
Wiener AS (1975) Chances of proving nonpaternity with tests for a sex-linked trait. Am J Hum Genet 27:243–245
Wiener AS, Lederer M, Polayes SH (1930) Studies in isohemagglutination. IV. On the chances of proving non-paternity; with special reference to the blood groups. J Immunol 19:259–282
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Additional information
Communicated by E. J. Eisen
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dodds, K.G., Tate, M.L., McEwan, J.C. et al. Exclusion probabilities for pedigree testing farm animals. Theoret. Appl. Genetics 92, 966–975 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00224036
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00224036