Abstract
Genotyping by sequencing (GBS) recently has emerged as a promising genomic approach for assessing genetic diversity on a genome-wide scale. However, concerns are not lacking about the uniquely large unbalance in GBS genotype data. Although some genotype imputation has been proposed to infer missing observations, little is known about the reliability of a genetic diversity analysis of GBS data, with up to 90% of observations missing. Here we performed an empirical assessment of accuracy in genetic diversity analysis of highly incomplete single nucleotide polymorphism genotypes with imputations. Three large single-nucleotide polymorphism genotype data sets for corn, wheat, and rice were acquired, and missing data with up to 90% of missing observations were randomly generated and then imputed for missing genotypes with three map-independent imputation methods. Estimating heterozygosity and inbreeding coefficient from original, missing, and imputed data revealed variable patterns of bias from assessed levels of missingness and genotype imputation, but the estimation biases were smaller for missing data without genotype imputation. The estimates of genetic differentiation were rather robust up to 90% of missing observations but became substantially biased when missing genotypes were imputed. The estimates of topology accuracy for four representative samples of interested groups generally were reduced with increased levels of missing genotypes. Probabilistic principal component analysis based imputation performed better in terms of topology accuracy than those analyses of missing data without genotype imputation. These findings are not only significant for understanding the reliability of the genetic diversity analysis with respect to large missing data and genotype imputation but also are instructive for performing a proper genetic diversity analysis of highly incomplete GBS or other genotype data.