Table 3.

Summary of Loci and Number of Discordant Typings

Locus Chr.location Conven-tional method[i] G/C content (%)[ii] Homology to Chr. 22 (bK246H3) (%)[iii] Homology to repeat elements Total Discord.[iv] Conventional assay[v] Invader assay[v] Failure rate Total discord.between 96- and 384-well formats
no. false hets no. false homs no. false hets no.false homs 96-well format (%) 384-well format (%)
INSg.-23A>T 11p15RFLP (HphI)658350.8
INSg.1127C>T 11p15RFLP (PstI)6701.3
LRP5g.-14279A>G 11q13cRFLP (NruI)6107162.6
LRP5g.-11215T>A 11q13N.T.300 AluYN.T.2.6
LRP5g.-11094G>A 11q13RFLP (BstX1)610 AluY2111.8
LRP5g.-10088G>A 11q13RFLP (FauI)59013761.03.40
LRP5g.-9693G>A 11q13RFLP (Acil)590111.32.92
LRP5g.-5802G>C 11q13RFLP (HincII)5693111.82.61
LRP5g.-5677C>T 11q13RFLP (MspI)4897 AluSp223.41.60
LRP5g.-5264G>A 11q13RFLP (AfIII)5193 AluJb222.12.30
LRP5g.-864A>G 11q13RFLP (MspI)638962132.62.31
LRP5g.2221C>T 11q13cRFLP (Hph)48928174.9
LRP5g.3103C>G 11q13RFLP (PflMI)569701.8
LRP5g.4780G>C 11q13RFLP (EcoNI)64588173.4
LRP5g.5257T>G 11q13cRFLP (SnaBI)36694222.6
LRP5g.7374G>A 11q13RFLP (AvaI)5083 AluJb7162.9
LRP5g.13963C>T 11q13N.T.6679N.T.1.8
LRP5g.24964C>T 11q13RFLP (MnlI)590111.0
LRP5g.28149C>T 11q13RFLP (MboII)440221.6
LRP5g.31856G>A 11q13RFLP (DpnI)600 AluSx31110.5
LRP5g.35592T>C 11q13N.T.540N.T.2.6
LRP5g.42125G>T 11q13N.T.490N.T.1.0
LRP5g.45704G>A 11q13N.T.6192 AluJbN.T.1.3
EST3c.448G>A 11q13RFLP (PstI)57115.7
EST4c.3021-3026del 11q13Length polymorph.2407.35.20
EST4c.3211G>A 11q13cRFLP (NlaIII)3103.63.40
EST4c.3403G>A 11q13N.T.34N.T.1.83.60
IL4-Rc.1216T>C 16p12RFLP (Tsp45I)5931111.8
IL4-Rc.1902A>G 16p12ARMs662110.5
GCG-R G40S17q25RFLP (BstEII)5406.0
ICAM-1 G241R19p13cRFLP (Stu1)/ARMS677161.6
ICAM-1 K469E19p13RFLP (MvnI)/ARMS604131.0
CTLA4g.-651C>T  2q33RFLP (Acil)3402.6
CTLA4g.49A>G  2q33RFLP (Bbvl)/dot blot565[vi] 1211.0
CTLA4g.920C>T  2q33RFLP (DdeI)38111.0
CTLA4g.-318C>T  2q33RFLP (MseI)2400.8
IRS1 G972R 2q36RFLP (SmaI)6804.9
 Total9819264494
 Error rate (%)0.820.160.220.030-.412.343.030.12

[i] (N.T.) The locus was not typed conventionally.

[ii] Percentage of bases with G or C 35 bp either side of the SNP.

[iii] Percentage of bases homologous to bac 6K246H3 35 bp either side of the polymorphism.

[iv] Number of individuals discordant between the two typing methods after a single typing. (N.T.) Not tested.

[v] Outcome of repeat typing. Each discordant individual was typed at least 4 times, twice with each technology. In all but one case a consensus genotype was established and one initial typing was incorrect.

[vi] A single individual consistantly typed as heterozygote with Invader technology but homozygote with PCR–RFLP.