Advertisement
Research Article

The Genomic Ancestry of Individuals from Different Geographical Regions of Brazil Is More Uniform Than Expected

  • Sérgio D. J. Pena mail,

    spena@dcc.ufmg.br

    Affiliation: Departamento de Bioquímica e Imunologia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    X
  • Giuliano Di Pietro,

    Affiliation: Departamento de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Ilhéus, Brazil

    X
  • Mateus Fuchshuber-Moraes,

    Affiliation: Coordenação de Pesquisa/Divisão de Farmacologia, Instituto Nacional do Câncer, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    X
  • Julia Pasqualini Genro,

    Affiliation: Departamento de Genética, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

    X
  • Mara H. Hutz,

    Affiliation: Departamento de Genética, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

    X
  • Fernanda de Souza Gomes Kehdy,

    Affiliation: Departamento de Bioquímica e Imunologia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    X
  • Fabiana Kohlrausch,

    Affiliation: Coordenação de Pesquisa/Divisão de Farmacologia, Instituto Nacional do Câncer, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    X
  • Luiz Alexandre Viana Magno,

    Affiliation: Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia de Medicina Molecular (INCT-MM), Laboratório de Neurociência, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    X
  • Raquel Carvalho Montenegro,

    Affiliation: Unidade de Farmacologia Clínica, Departamento de Fisiologia e Farmacologia, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil

    X
  • Manoel Odorico Moraes,

    Affiliation: Unidade de Farmacologia Clínica, Departamento de Fisiologia e Farmacologia, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil

    X
  • Maria Elisabete Amaral de Moraes,

    Affiliation: Unidade de Farmacologia Clínica, Departamento de Fisiologia e Farmacologia, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade Federal do Ceará, Fortaleza, Brazil

    X
  • Milene Raiol de Moraes,

    Affiliation: Laboratório de Genética Humana e Médica, Universidade Federal do Pará, Guamá, Brazil

    X
  • Élida B. Ojopi,

    Affiliation: Laboratório de Neurociências, Instituto de Psiquiatria, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil

    X
  • Jamila A. Perini,

    Affiliation: Coordenação de Pesquisa/Divisão de Farmacologia, Instituto Nacional do Câncer, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    X
  • Clarice Racciopi,

    Affiliation: Departamento de Bioquímica e Imunologia, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    X
  • Ândrea Kely Campos Ribeiro-dos-Santos,

    Affiliation: Laboratório de Genética Humana e Médica, Universidade Federal do Pará, Guamá, Brazil

    X
  • Fabrício Rios-Santos,

    Affiliation: Departamento de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Estadual de Santa Cruz, Ilhéus, Brazil

    X
  • Marco A. Romano-Silva,

    Affiliation: Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia de Medicina Molecular (INCT-MM), Laboratório de Neurociência, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil

    X
  • Vinicius A. Sortica,

    Affiliation: Departamento de Genética, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil

    X
  • Guilherme Suarez-Kurtz

    Affiliation: Coordenação de Pesquisa/Divisão de Farmacologia, Instituto Nacional do Câncer, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

    X
  • Published: February 16, 2011
  • DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0017063

Reader Comments (2)

Post a new comment on this article

Enter your comment title...

Posted by rmlpereira on 01 Mar 2011 at 17:02 GMT

It seems that the researchers developed a marker panel based on the criteria “allele frequency close to 0.5 in the European population” [1] and are using it for both paternity testing [2] and as “a panel of 40 validated ancestry-informative insertion-deletion DNA polymorphisms” [3].

The very same panel good for kinship testing and as validated AIMs? Markers selected to have allele frequency close to 0.5 in the European population as validated AIMs?

At least from my point of view the criteria preferred for the two purposes are completely different. Definitely, markers with high degree of polymorphism in different population groups for human identification and kinship testing. Definitely, markers with high divergence between different population groups to be used as AIMs and thus assessing admixture proportions.
Publicizing the same panel for both purposes is in my opinion erroneous.

Quoting [1]: “We accessed their data base (http://research.marsh&#64...) and identified 40 polymorphisms that fulfilled the following criteria: widespread chromosomal location, increasing amplicon sizes that allow multiplex analysis, and allele frequency close to 0.5 in the European population”.

Quoting [2]: “We developed a panel of 40 multiplexed short insertion-deletion (indel) polymorphic loci with widespread chromosomal locations and allele frequencies close to 0.50 in the European population. (…)The average heterozygosity (gene diversity) per locus was 0.48…”

Quoting [3]: “Using a panel of 40 validated ancestry-informative insertion-deletion DNA polymorphisms we estimated individually the European, African and Amerindian ancestry components of 934 self-categorized White, Brown or Black Brazilians from the four most populous regions of the Country. We unraveled great ancestral diversity between and within the different regions.”

References:

[1] Bastos-Rodrigues L, Pimenta JR, Pena SD (2006) The genetic structure of human populations studied through short insertion-deletion polymorphisms. Annals of Human Genetics 70: 658-665.

[2] Pimenta JR, Pena SD (2010) Efficient human paternity testing with a panel of 40 short insertion-deletion polymorphisms. Genetics and Molecular Research 9: 601-607.

[3] Pena SD, Di Pietro G, Fuchshuber-Moraes M, Genro JP, Hutz MH, et al. (2011) The Genomic Ancestry of Individuals from Different Geographical Regions of Brazil Is More Uniform Than Expected. PLoS ONE 6: e17063.

Competing interests declared: I work in a related subject.