Association Mapping Across a Multitude of Traits Collected in Diverse Environments Identifies Pleiotropic Loci in Maize

This article has been Reviewed by the following groups

Read the full article

Abstract

Classical genetic studies have identified many cases of pleiotropy where mutations in individual genes alter many different phenotypes. Quantitative genetic studies of natural genetic variants frequently examine one or a few traits, limiting their potential to identify pleiotropic effects of natural genetic variants. Widely adopted community association panels have been employed by plant genetics communities to study the genetic basis of naturally occurring phenotypic variation in a wide range of traits. High-density genetic marker data – 18M markers – from two partially overlapping maize association panels comprising 1,014 unique genotypes grown in field trials across at least seven US states and scored for 162 distinct trait datasets enabled the identification of of 2,154 suggestive marker-trait associations and 697 confident associations in the maize genome using a resampling-based genome-wide association strategy. The precision of individual marker-trait associations was estimated to be three genes based a reference set of genes with known phenotypes. Examples were observed of both genetic loci associated with variation in diverse traits (e.g. above-ground and below-ground traits), as well as individual loci associated with the same or similar traits across diverse environments. Many significant signals are located near genes whose functions were previously entirely unknown or estimated purely via functional data on homologs. This study demonstrates the potential of mining community association panel data using new higher density genetic marker sets combined with resampling-based genome-wide association tests to develop testable hypotheses about gene functions, identify potential pleiotropic effects of natural genetic variants, and study genotype by environment interaction.

Article activity feed

  1. This work has been peer reviewed in GigaScience (see https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giac080 ), which carries out open, named peer-review. These reviews are published under a CC-BY 4.0 license and were as follows:

    Reviewer 3: Reviewer name: Roberto Pilu **

    The manuscript "Association Mapping Across a Multitude of Traits Collected in Diverse Environments in Maize" by Ravi V. Mural et al. reported the application of high-density genetic marker data from two partially overlapping maize association panels, comprising 1,014 unique genotypes grown in seven US states, allowing the identification 2,154 suggestive marker-trait associations and 697 confident associations and suggesting the possible application to study gene functions, pleiotropic effects of natural genetic variants and genotype by environment interaction.

    The background data are well documented, experimental data are convincing, clearly presented and well discussed, the paper is suitable for publication in Giga Science in its present form.

  2. This work has been peer reviewed in GigaScience (see https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giac080 ), which carries out open, named peer-review. These reviews are published under a CC-BY 4.0 license and were as follows:

    Reviewer 2: Reviewer name: Yingjie Xiao.

    The authors described a study of integrating multiple published datasets for reanalysis. They combined previously community panel data and newly collected data in the present study, finally assembling 1014 accessions with 18M SNP markers and 162 traits at different environments. They used a resample-based GWAS method to reanalyze this assemble dataset, and identified 2154 suggestive associations and 697 confident associations. They found genetic loci were pleiotropic to multiple traits.

    As the authors mentioned, I acknowledge their efforts for collecting and assembling different sources of previously datasets, which should be useful for the maize community. However, to the manuscript per se, I feel the paper seems not to be sufficiently quantified regarding the novelty and significance of reported findings. If the authors could present several novel results because the previous studies had the limitations on population size, diversity, trait dimensions and environments. In this study, the authors seemed trying to present like this, but it may be improved further and more.

    It's hard to let me understand there are some novel things which was found due to the merged large dataset. On the other hand, using this assembled dataset, I'm not very clear what's the scientific questions that the authors want to address. In technical sense, I'm wondering how did authors deal with the batch effects when merging datasets phenotype from different environments? It's not comparable for the phenotypes from different accessions collected in different environments. It's hard to figure out the phenotypic difference is caused by genotype, environment, or their interaction.

    The introduction section lacked the proper review for the project background, related progress and publications and findings.

  3. This work has been peer reviewed in GigaScience (see https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giac080 ), which carries out open, named peer-review. These reviews are published under a CC-BY 4.0 license and were as follows:

    **Reviewer 1: Reviewer name: Yu Li **

    Reviewer Comments to Author: Mural et al. reported a large-scale association analysis based on publicly published genotype and phenotype datasets and a meta-GWAS. This study provides a good example for mining community association panel data and further identifying candidate genes, pleiotropic loci and G x E. Actually, metaanalysis of GWAS has been used in humans and animals. However, I have some major concerns as follows.

    1. This study only used three association panels (MAP, SAM, and WiDiv), as I know, some publicly available genotype and phenotype could be obtained for other association panels, for example the association panel including 368 inbred lines (Li et al., 2013, Nat Genetics, 45(1):43-50. doi: 10.1038/ng.2484), which was used widely in GWAS studies in maize. Can other association panels be integrated into this research, which would provide a rich genetic resource for maize research groups.

    2. For association analysis, a total of 1014 unique inbred lines and 162 distinct traits from different association panels were used, but these traits were not measured for each of 1041 inbreds. For example, cellular-related traits were mainly measured in the SAM association panel. Hence, association analysis for cellular-related traits were conducted in SAM or 1014 inbreds. If 1014 inbreds were used to perform association analysis for cellular-related traits, how did you analyze the phenotype data? Please describe the method of phenotype data analysis in the Method section.

    3. Authors used RMIP values to identify significant association signals, please add more details about the RMIP method. What advantages of the resampling-based genome-wide association strategy over other methods?

    4. Although some important functional genes could be identified, were some new candidate genes obtained in this study functionally verified by the mutants or overexpression experiments.

    5. The authors identified pleiotropic loci based on categories of phenotypes associated with the same peak. For example, the phenotypes associated with the pleiotropic peak on chromosome 8 from 134,706,389 to 134,759,977 bp belongs to Flowering Time, Root and Vegetative categories, thus the locus was associated with different traits. Do you have any ideas on pleiotropic genes based on the results?