Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Runs of Homozygosity

  1. #1
    Registered Users
    Posts
    167
    Sex
    Omitted

    Runs of Homozygosity

    Here's the link, in case anyone is interested in this tool: http://www.math.mun.ca/~dapike/FF23utils/roh.php

    These were my results:

    ROHs of length at least 400 will be reported.
    No-Call runs of length at least 10 will be reported.
    No-Calls will be treated as homozygous.
    Heterozygous SNPs that are at least 150 SNPs away from the nearest heterozygous SNP will be treated as homozygous.
    Chr 11 has a No-Call run of length 13 from position 55122337 to position 55163740 (41.40 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 20 from position 2980925 to position 3064873 (83.95 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 18 from position 3119025 to position 3187531 (68.51 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 17 from position 3199658 to position 3288828 (89.17 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 16 from position 3370270 to position 3461707 (91.44 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 25 from position 3496718 to position 3540985 (44.27 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 17 from position 3607060 to position 3687909 (80.85 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 17 from position 3700050 to position 3742867 (42.82 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 37 from position 3757126 to position 3824211 (67.08 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 45 from position 3850709 to position 4125381 (274.67 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 10 from position 4188793 to position 4259133 (70.34 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 16 from position 4268457 to position 4299428 (30.97 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 14 from position 4322761 to position 4369606 (46.84 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 56 from position 4372811 to position 4610107 (237.30 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 44 from position 4619101 to position 4783799 (164.70 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 18 from position 4809584 to position 4860467 (50.88 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 38 from position 4864521 to position 4931809 (67.29 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 24 from position 4942982 to position 4985084 (42.10 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 18 from position 4987998 to position 4999145 (11.15 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 41 from position 5017608 to position 5072099 (54.49 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 50 from position 5118273 to position 5247330 (129.06 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 38 from position 5263601 to position 5352479 (88.88 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 42 from position 5358470 to position 5426585 (68.11 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 85 from position 5445063 to position 5634967 (189.90 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 27 from position 5637743 to position 5732315 (94.57 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 20 from position 5740126 to position 5814102 (73.98 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 26 from position 5815943 to position 5957277 (141.33 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 14 from position 6009606 to position 6066768 (57.16 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 13 from position 6079917 to position 6133852 (53.94 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 12 from position 6142930 to position 6509519 (366.59 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 25 from position 6515097 to position 6796154 (281.06 Kb)
    Chr Y has a No-Call run of length 11 from position 19612089 to position 19613242 ( 1.15 Kb)

    Chr 6 has a ROH of length 654 from position 31669023 to position 32185146 ( 0.52 Mb)
    Chr 16 has a ROH of length 448 from position 2047219 to position 2085788 ( 0.04 Mb)

    Chr 1: 69.824 % (53699 of 76906 SNPs) are homozygous, 197 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 2: 68.351 % (52863 of 77341 SNPs) are homozygous, 207 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 3: 67.148 % (42492 of 63281 SNPs) are homozygous, 155 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 4: 67.122 % (36920 of 55004 SNPs) are homozygous, 151 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 5: 67.600 % (37869 of 56019 SNPs) are homozygous, 146 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 6: 68.938 % (43595 of 63238 SNPs) are homozygous, 171 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 7: 69.687 % (35557 of 51024 SNPs) are homozygous, 135 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 8: 68.673 % (33796 of 49213 SNPs) are homozygous, 129 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 9: 68.095 % (29259 of 42968 SNPs) are homozygous, 98 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 10: 68.119 % (34274 of 50315 SNPs) are homozygous, 146 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 11: 70.462 % (33781 of 47942 SNPs) are homozygous, 141 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 12: 68.151 % (32114 of 47122 SNPs) are homozygous, 130 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 13: 68.172 % (24593 of 36075 SNPs) are homozygous, 78 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 14: 68.337 % (21060 of 30818 SNPs) are homozygous, 88 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 15: 69.778 % (19817 of 28400 SNPs) are homozygous, 68 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 16: 69.427 % (20908 of 30115 SNPs) are homozygous, 85 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 17: 69.528 % (18580 of 26723 SNPs) are homozygous, 69 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 18: 68.614 % (19192 of 27971 SNPs) are homozygous, 62 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 19: 70.849 % (13129 of 18531 SNPs) are homozygous, 66 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 20: 67.081 % (15988 of 23834 SNPs) are homozygous, 57 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 21: 64.453 % ( 8638 of 13402 SNPs) are homozygous, 39 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 22: 67.064 % ( 9456 of 14100 SNPs) are homozygous, 49 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous

    Chr X: 1.531 % ( 398 of 26001 SNPs) are homozygous, 75 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr Y: 1764 SNPs, 1002 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    mtDNA : 2459 SNPs, 81 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous

    Total autosomal (Chr 1-22): 0.265 % ( 2467 of 930342 SNPs) are NoCalls
    Total autosomal (Chr 1-22): 31.468 % (292762 of 930342 SNPs) are Heterozygous (this tally excludes 0 heterozygous SNPs that were treated as homozygous)
    Total autosomal (Chr 1-22): 68.532 % (637580 of 930342 SNPs) are Homozygous (this tally includes 0 heterozygous SNPs that were treated as homozygous)
    Processing Completed

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to apophis99942 For This Useful Post:

     DMXX (08-29-2012)

  3. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,743
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2a*-M124 (L295-)
    mtDNA (M)
    D4j5*

    The "Total autosomal (Chr 1-22) ... Homozygous" values are most relevant to the discussion here and were cited specifically on DNA-Forums when users compared their own results. I recall having a value around AJL's.

    One possibly useful inference I can make from the Chr-specific Homozygous results is the range.

    Theoretically, those with parents who stem from genetically similar backgrounds that have underwent some form of genetic drift (i.e. a full-blooded Kalash) will have a smaller range across their Chr Homozygous values.

    To test this, I've compared my values with yours below.

    Code:
    Username			auDNA Homozygosity Average		auDNA Homozygosity Range	
    apophis99942			68.532 %				6.40%
    Humata				67.669 %				4.362%
    It's hard to clarify whether that assertion holds up or not based on two samples. I wonder what our other users get?

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to DMXX For This Useful Post:

     apophis99942 (08-29-2012)

  5. #3
    Registered Users
    Posts
    167
    Sex
    Omitted

    Yeah, two samples is probably nowhere near enough. Plus from what I remember reading, the results largely depend on the version of your submitted file (if it's V2 or V3). What I don't get is why it's held that the ~70% average for auDNA homozygosity delineates an inbred condition. How arbitrary is that and what is that being compared to?

  6. #4
    Registered Users
    Posts
    4,743
    Sex
    Y-DNA (P)
    R2a*-M124 (L295-)
    mtDNA (M)
    D4j5*

    I don't think any formal assessment was made into what value confers the status of "inbred". 70% was taken as the threshold on DNA-Forums. Perhaps one of the other former users there can clarify if I'm remembering correctly.

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to DMXX For This Useful Post:

     apophis99942 (08-29-2012)

  8. #5
    Registered Users
    Posts
    13
    Sex

    The % basically shows you an overall genetic distance between your parents; it may not detect recent inbreeding such as if your father's parents were first cousins.

    My % using this tool is as follows:

    V2: 65.82%
    V3: 67.98%

    But my parent's percentages are much higher:

    Father V3: 70.428% - Colonial American
    Mother V3: 72.555% - Filipino

    My mother's numbers are high, not necessarily because her parents were inbred, but because East Asian populations tend to have higher affinity with one another as opposed to African or European. I'm not sure why this is the case though.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to gijoeinfinity For This Useful Post:

     apophis99942 (08-29-2012),  DMXX (08-30-2012)

  10. #6
    Junior Member
    Posts
    25
    Sex
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Ethnicity
    West European mutt
    Nationality
    American
    Y-DNA (P)
    Z3000
    mtDNA (M)
    T2E

    My results are 70.562 %.

    I remember when this first came out a couple years back I had a biologist friend explain it to me - that my parents were from the same area.

    Bio-dad is 75% New England colonial going back to Mayflower ancestors. My mother is Plymouth and also Acadian.

    And my 14th GGM on my mother's side is the brother of my 11th GGF on my father's side, among others.

    I have found a few DNA matches that have ancestry connection to both sides of my tree.
    Last edited by botoole60611; 11-24-2012 at 06:13 PM.

  11. #7
    Registered Users
    Posts
    234
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    CEU
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c3i

    United States of America
    I've looked at quite of few of these results on the "How inbred are you" thread at 23andme, and here's what I discovered:

    -Overall homozygosity increases with (1.) consanguinity, (2.) endogamy, (3.) Northward in Europe, and (4.) having parents from the same gene pool.
    -Overall homozygosity decreases with (1.) genetic distance of the parents and (2) living at the crossroads where populations are diverse.
    -Consanguinity is most easily observed via auDNA Homozygosity Range. Sometimes just one or 2 chromosomes will show higher-than-average homozygosity, but for individuals who come from cultures that practice cousin marriage, the range can be stunning (67-93%)!
    -Overall number of ROH's increases and decreases in the same pattern as overall homozygosity.
    -Size of ROH's does too. The more consanguineous, endogamous, or Northern (European) you are, the bigger the ROH's.
    -I haven't observed enough samples from distinct populations but I can say with some certainty from the samples I've seen that Europeans, in general, have lower homozygosity numbers than Africans and Asians. There's one 100% African sample I know of, I'm sharing with him at 23andme, and his v2 70.438% blows my higher end N Euro 68.551% v2 results out of the water!
    -X homozygosity is interesting for females. My daughter's 75.060% v3 is higher end for European but I've seen it hit the 77% range.
    -Check for no-call run's - I see apophis99942 has one on the 11th chromosome. You can research it by plugging 11q11. I know theres a common CNV located there related to obesity:
    http://genome.ucsc.edu/cgi-bin/hgTra...gsid=312218089
    -In Europe, Swedes and Lithuanians seem to get the highest homozygosity and ROH's, from what I've seen. You can check Evon_Evon's spreadsheet for comparisons (eastwind87 is Chinese but those are v2 results and she still has top score - I'd really love to see a v3 Chinese sample=) :
    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...hl=en_GB#gid=0

    If you want to observe different examples, go to this 23andme thread:
    https://www.23andme.com/you/community/thread/3093/

    Consanguinity - cousin marriage:
    Faris123 June 15, 2011
    zack_a Nov 13, 2011 - He also blogged about his v2 results here, notice how much range for the individual chromosomes he has (mine range between 67-70%) http://www.zackvision.com/weblog/2011/01/inbreeding/

    Endogamy - French Canadians:
    LargoDominus Aug 10, 2011
    Eric from Chicontimi Aug 10, 2011

    4GP Northern European:
    L. Stockhom (Swedish) May 13, 2011
    Alina76 (Lithuanian) Nov 13, 2012
    My Gedmatch kits: M102536 (v3 upgrade); M054852 (v2); A449981 (Ancestry v1)
    Known: 87.5% UK/Ireland American Colonial; 12.5% PA Dutch Mennonites from Germany & Switzerland
    J1c3i mitochondrial ancestress was Swiss Mennonite from Conestoga, Lancaster PA

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Little bit For This Useful Post:

     apophis99942 (11-28-2012),  DMXX (11-24-2012)

  13. #8
    Registered Users
    Posts
    234
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    CEU
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c3i

    United States of America
    And here's my outbred N European mother but same gene pool. My mom has very high homozygosity for an outbred American, but her ROH's are small, few over 1.5Mb, and her chromosomes are very stable. Evidently her Irish/English/German ancestors were similar enough to reach higher homozygosity when mixed:

    Chr 1 has a ROH of length 303 from position 154924239 to position 155940948 ( 1.02 Mb)
    Chr 1 has a ROH of length 200 from position 156063880 to position 156238593 ( 0.17 Mb)
    Chr 1 has a ROH of length 275 from position 224936295 to position 225903098 ( 0.97 Mb)
    Chr 2 has a ROH of length 533 from position 31549662 to position 33329957 ( 1.78 Mb)
    Chr 2 has a ROH of length 368 from position 75288700 to position 76109411 ( 0.82 Mb)
    Chr 2 has a ROH of length 253 from position 134727667 to position 135218605 ( 0.49 Mb)
    Chr 2 has a ROH of length 258 from position 135722328 to position 136824836 ( 1.10 Mb)
    Chr 2 has a ROH of length 201 from position 140019620 to position 140665986 ( 0.65 Mb)
    Chr 2 has a ROH of length 502 from position 158193407 to position 159672168 ( 1.48 Mb)
    Chr 3 has a ROH of length 439 from position 37034946 to position 37531856 ( 0.50 Mb)
    Chr 3 has a ROH of length 297 from position 55802668 to position 56797985 ( 1.00 Mb)
    Chr 3 has a ROH of length 202 from position 107794140 to position 108531753 ( 0.74 Mb)
    Chr 4 has a ROH of length 261 from position 9915741 to position 10310495 ( 0.39 Mb)
    Chr 5 has a ROH of length 223 from position 57503024 to position 58071799 ( 0.57 Mb)
    Chr 5 has a ROH of length 339 from position 112218700 to position 113118069 ( 0.90 Mb)
    Chr 6 has a ROH of length 1377 from position 30316980 to position 31236567 ( 0.92 Mb)
    Chr 6 has a ROH of length 433 from position 31253878 to position 31435991 ( 0.18 Mb)
    Chr 6 has a ROH of length 278 from position 33024499 to position 33185918 ( 0.16 Mb)
    Chr 6 has a ROH of length 247 from position 122046232 to position 123006095 ( 0.96 Mb)
    Chr 7 has a ROH of length 206 from position 98933689 to position 99365451 ( 0.43 Mb)
    Chr 7 has a ROH of length 297 from position 116929065 to position 117440972 ( 0.51 Mb)
    Chr 8 has a ROH of length 256 from position 19536790 to position 19876970 ( 0.34 Mb)
    Chr 10 has a ROH of length 407 from position 94090498 to position 95064403 ( 0.97 Mb)
    Chr 11 has a ROH of length 246 from position 5244404 to position 5255790 ( 0.01 Mb)
    Chr 11 has a ROH of length 223 from position 9622111 to position 10393873 ( 0.77 Mb)
    Chr 11 has a ROH of length 208 from position 47235918 to position 48066048 ( 0.83 Mb)
    Chr 11 has a ROH of length 212 from position 81225948 to position 81582575 ( 0.36 Mb)
    Chr 12 has a ROH of length 369 from position 103169397 to position 103341908 ( 0.17 Mb)
    Chr 14 has a ROH of length 302 from position 41928909 to position 42988346 ( 1.06 Mb)
    Chr 14 has a ROH of length 240 from position 73489268 to position 73964278 ( 0.48 Mb)
    Chr 16 has a ROH of length 229 from position 2126043 to position 2138252 ( 0.01 Mb)
    Chr 16 has a ROH of length 235 from position 16130340 to position 16256678 ( 0.13 Mb)
    Chr 16 has a ROH of length 335 from position 30118750 to position 31384687 ( 1.27 Mb)
    Chr 17 has a ROH of length 234 from position 48267228 to position 48275866 ( 0.01 Mb)
    Chr 17 has a ROH of length 257 from position 50212182 to position 51118173 ( 0.91 Mb)
    Chr 18 has a ROH of length 207 from position 24517015 to position 24654150 ( 0.14 Mb)
    Chr 18 has a ROH of length 252 from position 66576237 to position 67169994 ( 0.59 Mb)
    Chr 19 has a ROH of length 208 from position 37371732 to position 38475375 ( 1.10 Mb)
    Chr 20 has a ROH of length 288 from position 48110188 to position 48793362 ( 0.68 Mb)
    Chr 22 has a ROH of length 245 from position 28198577 to position 29379731 ( 1.18 Mb)
    Chr 22 has a ROH of length 214 from position 42372381 to position 42691238 ( 0.32 Mb)
    Chr X has a ROH of length 227 from position 55024559 to position 58178159 ( 3.15 Mb)
    Chr X has a ROH of length 593 from position 72351056 to position 78620053 ( 6.27 Mb)
    Chr X has a ROH of length 263 from position 153274228 to position 153540977 ( 0.27 Mb)
    Chr Y has a ROH of length 1766 from position 2649694 to position 59032809 (56.38 Mb)

    Chr 1: 71.618 % (55081 of 76909 SNPs) are homozygous, 284 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 2: 71.325 % (55167 of 77346 SNPs) are homozygous, 271 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 3: 70.037 % (44323 of 63285 SNPs) are homozygous, 233 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 4: 70.740 % (38919 of 55017 SNPs) are homozygous, 218 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 5: 70.753 % (39635 of 56019 SNPs) are homozygous, 189 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 6: 71.082 % (44955 of 63244 SNPs) are homozygous, 292 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 7: 69.756 % (35551 of 50965 SNPs) are homozygous, 207 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 8: 69.330 % (34121 of 49215 SNPs) are homozygous, 168 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 9: 69.695 % (29948 of 42970 SNPs) are homozygous, 148 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 10: 71.158 % (35808 of 50322 SNPs) are homozygous, 190 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 11: 71.148 % (34131 of 47972 SNPs) are homozygous, 208 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 12: 70.606 % (33273 of 47125 SNPs) are homozygous, 193 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 13: 71.373 % (25750 of 36078 SNPs) are homozygous, 137 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 14: 69.907 % (21544 of 30818 SNPs) are homozygous, 89 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 15: 70.358 % (19981 of 28399 SNPs) are homozygous, 106 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 16: 72.241 % (21793 of 30167 SNPs) are homozygous, 107 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 17: 71.066 % (18966 of 26688 SNPs) are homozygous, 102 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 18: 71.892 % (20109 of 27971 SNPs) are homozygous, 88 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 19: 72.697 % (13473 of 18533 SNPs) are homozygous, 143 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 20: 71.876 % (17131 of 23834 SNPs) are homozygous, 74 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 21: 70.859 % ( 9498 of 13404 SNPs) are homozygous, 49 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr 22: 71.291 % (10052 of 14100 SNPs) are homozygous, 72 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous

    Chr X: 74.580 % (19396 of 26007 SNPs) are homozygous, 86 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    Chr Y: 1766 SNPs, 1766 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous
    mtDNA : 2459 SNPs, 25 No-Calls, 0 heterozygous SNPs treated as homozygous

    Total autosomal (Chr 1-22): 0.383 % ( 3568 of 930381 SNPs) are NoCalls
    Total autosomal (Chr 1-22): 29.146 % (271172 of 930381 SNPs) are Heterozygous (this tally excludes 0 heterozygous SNPs that were treated as homozygous)
    Total autosomal (Chr 1-22): 70.854 % (659209 of 930381 SNPs) are Homozygous (this tally includes 0 heterozygous SNPs that were treated as homozygous)
    My Gedmatch kits: M102536 (v3 upgrade); M054852 (v2); A449981 (Ancestry v1)
    Known: 87.5% UK/Ireland American Colonial; 12.5% PA Dutch Mennonites from Germany & Switzerland
    J1c3i mitochondrial ancestress was Swiss Mennonite from Conestoga, Lancaster PA

  14. #9
    Registered Users
    Posts
    24
    Sex

    Quote Originally Posted by Little bit View Post
    I've looked at quite of few of these results on the "How inbred are you" thread at 23andme, and here's what I discovered:

    -Overall homozygosity increases with (1.) consanguinity, (2.) endogamy, (3.) Northward in Europe, and (4.) having parents from the same gene pool.
    -Overall homozygosity decreases with (1.) genetic distance of the parents and (2) living at the crossroads where populations are diverse.
    -Consanguinity is most easily observed via auDNA Homozygosity Range. Sometimes just one or 2 chromosomes will show higher-than-average homozygosity, but for individuals who come from cultures that practice cousin marriage, the range can be stunning (67-93%)!
    -Overall number of ROH's increases and decreases in the same pattern as overall homozygosity.
    -Size of ROH's does too. The more consanguineous, endogamous, or Northern (European) you are, the bigger the ROH's.
    Wrong (the part in bold). Check all Lithuanians at Evon's spreadsheet again - 6 of us there from all over the country, so, it's fairly representative.
    ROH V3. homozygosity

    Large ROHs are not more abundant than in Southern or Central Europe while overall homozygosity percentages are among the highest in Europe - if not the highest. The two factors aren't related.
    There are also 7 Finns in the spreadsheet - they ought to have higher homozigosity scores than us, if what you say was true: Finland is so much further North than Lithuania. But in reality they don't - quite on the contrary.
    Last edited by Private_user; 11-24-2012 at 06:01 PM.

  15. #10
    Registered Users
    Posts
    234
    Sex
    Ethnicity
    CEU
    mtDNA (M)
    J1c3i

    United States of America
    I find big ROH's more common in Northern Europeans but there are always exceptions. Whatever keeps a population from gaining outside admixture whether it be distance, culture, or other forces will, over time, cause that population to lose heterozygosity. Even within Sweden, there is a difference between Northern and Southern populations when it comes to homozygosity, with the far Northern showing a larger number of extended homozygous regions:

    Extended homozygous segments

    The observed patterns of homozygosity further reinforce the picture of a genetic divide between the southern and northern parts of Sweden. While the differences in the number of extended homozygous segments were mostly small and non-significant for the southern national areas, the counties corresponding to the three northernmost national areas had a larger number of extended homozygous regions, suggestive of an increase in autozygosity. The northern national areas are much more sparsely populated than the southern with vast geographical distances between towns and villages, a fact that may have contributed to the observed loss of heterozygosity. The increased level of genetic homogeneity in the north may be an advantage if a study is set to search for recessive genetic variants with high penetrance, as by means of linkage studies.
    http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0022547
    My Gedmatch kits: M102536 (v3 upgrade); M054852 (v2); A449981 (Ancestry v1)
    Known: 87.5% UK/Ireland American Colonial; 12.5% PA Dutch Mennonites from Germany & Switzerland
    J1c3i mitochondrial ancestress was Swiss Mennonite from Conestoga, Lancaster PA

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. G25 Admix custom runs
    By ph2ter in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 64
    Last Post: 02-02-2020, 06:07 PM
  2. Ancient admix runs
    By ph2ter in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 01-31-2020, 05:56 PM
  3. Vahaduo Runs
    By Nino90 in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 12-31-2019, 10:32 AM
  4. Runs of Homozygosity (ROHs)
    By ViktorL1 in forum General
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-11-2016, 08:39 AM
  5. Gedmatch admixture runs
    By Gray Fox in forum Autosomal (auDNA)
    Replies: 43
    Last Post: 09-06-2014, 11:11 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •