Have been very busy recently.
Here are some brief points for you to consider:
1. For small-effect QTL, association mapping will have
no advantage at all.
We will find a lot of QTL but we can do nothing with them. Just for
publication. If you go for them, you do not need to worry as you can always
publish in a journal by the end.(回复中的黑体字是我自己加的)
2. For large-effect QTL, it is hard to have a complete story for publication
in a high IF journal.
Association mapping has to be combined with other
approaches including biparental population-based linkage mapping and others.
Joint linkage-LD mapping is a choice. We have a recent paper in PNAS about
this, which addressed the strategies: parallel and integrated joint mapping.(这篇文章本博客有:关联作图和连锁作图的结合
http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=space&uid=479743&do=blog&id=378810)
3. Does not matter how good an AM panel is.
It can be only good for some
traits, if you want to clone the genes by the end.
4.
The key is the population size (better with over 500 accessions) and they
comes from different origins and breeding programs etc.
5. For genes with rare alleles, AM will not work. So be sure your panel is
segregating normally for the traits of interest.
6.
The more important the trait of interest is, the higher chance to have
strong competition. So if you work on a hot trait, you have to be ready for
all kinds of competition, e.g. four groups in the world work on the same
genes at about the same rate.
All the recent review papers will not tell you many truth about the
disadvantages of AM. You will have to learn by practice or by doing.
Sometimes you will know them too late.
So many people are interested in AM as an independent approach. We will
repeat soon the history of mapping QTL with small effects: finding thousands
of QTL but doing nothing for real breeding.
Hope this is helpful.
Yunbi