Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 85
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    Calboli, Federico C. F. Byström, Pär and Merilä, Juha 2016. A test for within-lake niche differentiation in the nine-spined sticklebacks (Pungitius pungitius). Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 6, Issue. 14, p. 4753.

    Cappa, Eduardo P. Klápště, Jaroslav Garcia, Martín N. Villalba, Pamela V. and Marcucci Poltri, Susana N. 2016. SSRs, SNPs and DArTs comparison on estimation of relatedness and genetic parameters’ precision from a small half-sib sample population of Eucalyptus grandis. Molecular Breeding, Vol. 36, Issue. 7,

    Doyle, Roger W 2016. Inbreeding and disease in tropical shrimp aquaculture: a reappraisal and caution. Aquaculture Research, Vol. 47, Issue. 1, p. 21.

    Gerber, Livia Krützen, Michael de Ruiter, Jan R. van Schaik, Carel P. and van Noordwijk, Maria A. 2016. Postdispersal nepotism in male long-tailed macaques (Macaca fascicularis). Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 6, Issue. 1, p. 46.

    Guan, Jiantao Wang, Weiji Luan, Sheng Ma, Yu Hu, Yulong Xu, Liyong and Kong, Jie 2016. Estimation of genetic parameters for early growth trait of turbot (Scophthalmus maximusL.) using molecular relatedness. Aquaculture Research, Vol. 47, Issue. 7, p. 2205.

    Hammerly, S. C. de la Cerda, D. A. Bailey, H. and Johnson, J. A. 2016. A pedigree gone bad: increased offspring survival after using DNA-based relatedness to minimize inbreeding in a captive population. Animal Conservation, Vol. 19, Issue. 3, p. 296.

    Ivy, Jamie A. Putnam, Andrea S. Navarro, Asako Y. Gurr, Jessica and Ryder, Oliver A. 2016. Applying SNP-Derived Molecular Coancestry Estimates to Captive Breeding Programs. Journal of Heredity, Vol. 107, Issue. 5, p. 403.

    Keane, Kit T. Hill, Peggy S. M. and Booth, Warren 2016. The kin selection hypothesis in a lekking mole cricket: assessing nested patterns of relatedness. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society, Vol. 118, Issue. 2, p. 382.

    Levine, Brenna A. Smith, Charles F. Douglas, Marlis R. Davis, Mark A. Schuett, Gordon W. Beaupre, Steven J. and Douglas, Michael E. 2016. Population Genetics of the Copperhead at Its Most Northeastern Distribution. Copeia, Vol. 104, Issue. 2, p. 448.

    Morvezen, R Boudry, P Laroche, J and Charrier, G 2016. Stock enhancement or sea ranching? Insights from monitoring the genetic diversity, relatedness and effective population size in a seeded great scallop population (Pecten maximus). Heredity,

    Rudolph, Kathleen P. and McEntee, Jay P. 2016. Spoils of war and peace: enemy adoption and queen-right colony fusion follow costly intraspecific conflict in acacia ants. Behavioral Ecology, Vol. 27, Issue. 3, p. 793.

    Russo, M. Gabriela Mendisco, Fanny Avena, Sergio A. Dejean, Cristina B. and Seldes, Verónica 2016. Pre-Hispanic Mortuary Practices in Quebrada de Humahuaca (North-Western Argentina): Genetic Relatedness among Individuals Buried in the Same Grave. Annals of Human Genetics, Vol. 80, Issue. 4, p. 210.

    Schneider, Tilman C. Kappeler, Peter M. and Pozzi, Luca 2016. Genetic population structure and relatedness in the narrow-striped mongoose (Mungotictis decemlineata), a social Malagasy carnivore with sexual segregation. Ecology and Evolution, Vol. 6, Issue. 11, p. 3734.

    Stansbury, Carisa R. Ausband, David E. Zager, Peter Mack, Curt M. and Waits, Lisette P. 2016. Identifying gray wolf packs and dispersers using noninvasive genetic samples. The Journal of Wildlife Management,

    Stockwell, Brian L. Larson, Wesley A. Waples, Ryan K. Abesamis, Rene A. Seeb, Lisa W. and Carpenter, Kent E. 2016. The application of genomics to inform conservation of a functionally important reef fish (Scarus niger) in the Philippines. Conservation Genetics, Vol. 17, Issue. 1, p. 239.

    Sun, M. Jobling, M.A. Taliun, D. Pramstaller, P.P. Egeland, T. and Sheehan, N.A. 2016. On the use of dense SNP marker data for the identification of distant relative pairs. Theoretical Population Biology, Vol. 107, p. 14.

    Wang, Jinliang 2016. Pedigrees or markers: Which are better in estimating relatedness and inbreeding coefficient?. Theoretical Population Biology, Vol. 107, p. 4.

    Wang, Jinliang 2016. Individual identification from genetic marker data: developments and accuracy comparisons of methods. Molecular Ecology Resources, Vol. 16, Issue. 1, p. 163.

    Watts, Kevin Vanhala, Tytti Connolly, Thomas and Cottrell, Joan 2016. Striking the right balance between site and landscape-scale conservation actions for a woodland insect within a highly fragmented landscape: A landscape genetics perspective. Biological Conservation, Vol. 195, p. 146.

    Zanardo, N. Bilgmann, K. Parra, G. J. and Möller, L. M. 2016. Socio-genetic structure of short-beaked common dolphins in southern Australia. Journal of Zoology, Vol. 299, Issue. 2, p. 89.


Triadic IBD coefficients and applications to estimating pairwise relatedness

  • DOI:
  • Published online: 01 September 2007

Knowledge of the genetic relatedness among individuals is essential in diverse research areas such as behavioural ecology, conservation biology, quantitative genetics and forensics. How to estimate relatedness accurately from genetic marker information has been explored recently by many methodological studies. In this investigation I propose a new likelihood method that uses the genotypes of a triad of individuals in estimating pairwise relatedness (r). The idea is to use a third individual as a control (reference) in estimating the r between two other individuals, thus reducing the chance of genes identical in state being mistakenly inferred as identical by descent. The new method allows for inbreeding and accounts for genotype errors in data. Analyses of both simulated and human microsatellite and SNP datasets show that the quality of r estimates (measured by the root mean squared error, RMSE) is generally improved substantially by the new triadic likelihood method (TL) over the dyadic likelihood method and five moment estimators. Simulations also show that genotyping errors/mutations, when ignored, result in underestimates of r for related dyads, and that incorporating a model of typing errors in the TL method improves r estimates for highly related dyads but impairs those for loosely related or unrelated dyads. The effects of inbreeding were also investigated through simulations. It is concluded that, because most dyads in a natural population are unrelated or only loosely related, the overall performance of the new triadic likelihood method is the best, offering r estimates with a RMSE that is substantially smaller than the five commonly used moment estimators and the dyadic likelihood method.

Corresponding author
*Corresponding author. Telephone: +44 20 74496620. Fax: +44 20 75862870. e-mail:
Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

J. M. Aparicio , J. Ortego & P. J. Cordero (2006). What should we weigh to estimate heterozygosity, alleles or loci? Molecular Ecology 15, 46594665.

M. S. Blouin (2003). DNA-based methods for pedigree reconstruction and kinship analysis in natural populations. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18, 503511.

A. Bonin , E. Bellemain , P. B. Eidesen , F. Pompanon , C. Brochmann & P. Taberlet (2004). How to track and assess genotyping errors in population genetics studies. Molecular Ecology 13, 32613273.

K. Csilléry , T. Johnson , D. Beraldi , T. H. Clutton-Brock , D. Coltman , B. Hansson , G. Spong & J. Pemberton (2006). Performance of marker-based relatedness estimators in natural populations of outbred vertebrates. Genetics 173, 20912101.

W. D. Hamilton (1964). The genetical evolution of social behaviour: I and II. Journal of Theoretical Biology 7, 152.

A. Jacquard (1972). Genetic information given by a relative. Biometrics 28, 11011114.

C. C. Li , D. E. Weeks & A. Chakravarti (1993). Similarity of DNA fingerprints due to chance and relatedness. Human Heredity 43, 4552.

M. B. Morrissey & A. J. Wilson (2005). The potential costs of accounting for genotypic errors in molecular parentage analyses. Molecular Ecology 14, 41114121.

P. A. Oliehoek , J. J. Windig , J. A. M. van Arendonk & P. Bijma (2006). Estimating relatedness between individuals in general populations with a focus on their use in conservation programs. Genetics 173, 483496.

F. Pompanon , A. Bonin , E. Bellemain , & P. Taberlet (2005). Genotyping errors: causes, consequences and solutions. Nature Reviews Genetics 6, 847859.

D. C. Queller & K. F. Goodnight (1989). Estimating relatedness using molecular markers. Evolution 43, 258275.

K. Ritland (2000). Marker-inferred relatedness as a tool for detecting heritability in nature. Molecular Ecology 9, 11951204.

K. Ritland (2005). Multilocus estimation of pairwise relatedness with dominant markers. Molecular Ecology 14, 31573165.

S. C. Thomas (2005). The estimation of genetic relationships using molecular markers and their efficiency in estimating heritability in natural populations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B 360, 14571467.

S. C. Thomas , J. M. Pemberton & W. G. Hill (2000). Estimating variance components in natural populations using inferred relationships. Heredity 84, 427436.

E. A. Thompson (1974). Gene identities and multiple relationships. Biometrics 30, 667680.

T. Van de Casteele , P. Galbusera & E. Matthysen (2001). A comparison of microsatellite-based pairwise relatedness estimates. Molecular Ecology 10, 15391549.

J. Wang (2004 a). Sibship reconstruction from genetic data with typing errors. Genetics 166, 19631979.

J. Wang (2004 b) Estimating pairwise relatedness from dominant genetic markers. Molecular Ecology 13, 31693178.

J. Wang (2006). Informativeness of genetic markers for pairwise relationship and relatedness inference. Theoretical Population Biology 70, 300321.

B. S. Weir , A. D. Anderson , and A. B. Hepler (2006). Genetic relatedness analysis: modern data and new challenges. Nature Reviews Genetics 7, 771780.

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Genetics Research
  • ISSN: 0016-6723
  • EISSN: 1469-5073
  • URL: /core/journals/genetics-research
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *