Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Epistasis Analysis

Epistasis Analysis

Although Mendel chose seven unrelated traits in peas to study gene segregation, most traits involve multiple gene interactions that create a spectrum of phenotypes. When the interaction of various genes or alleles at different locations influences a phenotype, this is called epistasis. Epistasis often involves one gene masking or interfering with the expression of another (antagonistic epistasis). Epistasis often occurs when different genes are part of the same biochemical pathway. The...

Epistasis

Epistasis

In addition to multiple alleles at the same locus influencing traits, numerous genes or alleles at different locations may interact and influence phenotypes in a phenomenon called epistasis. For example, rabbit fur can be black or brown depending on whether the animal is homozygous dominant or heterozygous at a TYRP1 locus. However, if the rabbit is also homozygous recessive at a locus on the tyrosinase gene (TYR), it will have an unshaded coat that appears white, regardless of its TYRP1...

Genetic Screens

Genetic Screens

Genetic screens are tools used to identify genes and mutations responsible for phenotypes of interest. Genetic screens help identify individuals or a group of people at risk of developing genetic diseases and help them with early intervention, targeted therapy, and reproductive options.
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which result in visible changes...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

[Melatonin and delirium].

Zhonghua wei zhong bing ji jiu yi xue·2013

Same author

Activation of the Nrf2 pathway by inorganic arsenic in human hepatocytes and the role of transcriptional repressor Bach1.

Oxidative medicine and cellular longevity·2013

Same author

Simultaneous Quantification of Limonin, Two Indolequinazoline Alkaloids, and Four Quinolone Alkaloids in Evodia rutaecarpa (Juss.) Benth by HPLC-DAD Method.

Journal of analytical methods in chemistry·2013

Same author

Ten-eleven translocation 1 (Tet1) is regulated by O-linked N-acetylglucosamine transferase (Ogt) for target gene repression in mouse embryonic stem cells.

The Journal of biological chemistry·2013

Same author

BAD overexpression inhibits cell growth and induces apoptosis via mitochondrial-dependent pathway in non-small cell lung cancer.

Cancer cell international·2013

Same author

Cigarette smoking is associated with human semen quality in synergy with functional NRF2 polymorphisms.

Biology of reproduction·2013

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: May 26, 2026

An Allele-specific Gene Expression Assay to Test the Functional Basis of Genetic Associations

An Allele-specific Gene Expression Assay to Test the Functional Basis of Genetic Associations

Published on: November 3, 2010

Performance analysis of novel methods for detecting epistasis.

Junliang Shang¹, Junying Zhang, Yan Sun

¹School of Computer Science & Technology, Xidian University, Xi'an 710071, China. jlshang@mail.xidian.edu.cn

BMC Bioinformatics

|December 17, 2011

Summary

This study compares five epistasis detection methods, finding AntEpiSeeker and BOOST most effective overall. These methods offer guidelines for identifying genetic variations contributing to disease.

More Related Videos

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Published on: August 22, 2018

Screening for Functional Non-coding Genetic Variants Using Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA) and DNA-affinity Precipitation Assay (DAPA)

Screening for Functional Non-coding Genetic Variants Using Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA) and DNA-affinity Precipitation Assay (DAPA)

Published on: August 21, 2016

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: May 26, 2026

An Allele-specific Gene Expression Assay to Test the Functional Basis of Genetic Associations

An Allele-specific Gene Expression Assay to Test the Functional Basis of Genetic Associations

Published on: November 3, 2010

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Probing the Limits of Egg Recognition Using Egg Rejection Experiments Along Phenotypic Gradients

Published on: August 22, 2018

Screening for Functional Non-coding Genetic Variants Using Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA) and DNA-affinity Precipitation Assay (DAPA)

Screening for Functional Non-coding Genetic Variants Using Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA) and DNA-affinity Precipitation Assay (DAPA)

Published on: August 21, 2016

Area of Science:

Genetics and Genomics
Bioinformatics
Computational Biology

Background:

Epistasis, the interaction between genes, is crucial for understanding genetic disease mechanisms.
Despite numerous epistasis detection methods, comprehensive comparative studies are lacking.
A comparative analysis is essential for advancing these methods toward practical applications.

Purpose of the Study:

To conduct a comparative analysis of prominent epistasis detection methods.
To evaluate method performance across diverse simulated datasets and noise conditions.
To provide insights into the strengths and limitations of each method.

Main Methods:

Selected five representative epistasis detection software packages: TEAM, BOOST, SNPRuler, AntEpiSeeker, and epiMODE.
Categorized methods based on search strategies and underlying techniques.
Tested methods on simulated datasets varying in size, epistasis models, and noise types (missing data, genotyping error, phenocopy).

Main Results:

Performance evaluated using detection power, robustness, sensitivity, and computational complexity.
AntEpiSeeker excelled in detecting epistasis with marginal effects (eME), while BOOST was superior for non-marginal effects (eNME).
BOOST demonstrated the fastest computational speed.

Conclusions:

No single method is optimal for all scenarios; each has unique strengths and weaknesses.
AntEpiSeeker and BOOST are recommended for their overall efficiency and effectiveness in epistasis detection.
Findings offer guidance for method selection and highlight areas for future research in genetic variation analysis.