Literature DB >> 16085700

Bias and precision in QST estimates: problems and some solutions.

R B O'Hara1, J Merilä.   

Abstract

Comparison of population differentiation in neutral marker genes and in genes coding quantitative traits by means of F(ST) and Q(ST) indexes has become commonplace practice. While the properties and estimation of F(ST) have been the subject of much interest, little is known about the precision and possible bias in Q(ST) estimates. Using both simulated and real data, we investigated the precision and bias in Q(ST) estimates and various methods of estimating the precision. We found that precision of Q(ST) estimates for typical data sets (i.e., with <20 populations) was poor. Of the methods for estimating the precision, a simulation method, a parametric bootstrap, and the Bayesian approach returned the most precise estimates of the confidence intervals.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16085700      PMCID: PMC1456852          DOI: 10.1534/genetics.105.044545

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genetics        ISSN: 0016-6731            Impact factor:   4.562


  10 in total

1.  Molecular and quantitative genetic divergence among populations of house mice with known evolutionary histories.

Authors:  T J Morgan; M A Evans; T Garland; J G Swallow; P A Carter
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 3.821

2.  Comparing Bayesian estimates of genetic differentiation of molecular markers and quantitative traits: an application to Pinus sylvestris.

Authors:  P Waldmann; M R García-Gil; M J Sillanpää
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.821

3.  Nonparametric confidence interval estimators for heritability and expected selection response.

Authors:  S J Knapp; W C Bridges; M H Yang
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1989-04       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  Patterns of genetic architecture for life-history traits and molecular markers in a subdivided species.

Authors:  K K Morgan; J Hicks; K Spitze; L Latta; M E Pfrender; C S Weaver; M Ottone; M Lynch
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.694

5.  Population structure of morphological traits in Clarkia dudleyana. I. Comparison of FST between allozymes and morphological traits.

Authors:  R H Podolsky; T P Holtsford
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Population structure in Daphnia obtusa: quantitative genetic and allozymic variation.

Authors:  K Spitze
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  1993-10       Impact factor: 4.562

7.  Population differentiation in G matrix structure due to natural selection in Rana temporaria.

Authors:  José Manuel Cano; Anssi Laurila; Jukka Pało; Juha Merilä
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 3.694

8.  Latitudinal countergradient variation in the common frog (Rana temporaria) development rates--evidence for local adaptation.

Authors:  A T Laugen; A Laurila; K Räsänen; J Merilä
Journal:  J Evol Biol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 2.411

9.  Contemporary fisherian life-history evolution in small salmonid populations.

Authors:  Mikko T Koskinen; Thrond O Haugen; Craig R Primmer
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-10-24       Impact factor: 49.962

10.  Latitudinal divergence of common frog (Rana temporaria) life history traits by natural selection: evidence from a comparison of molecular and quantitative genetic data.

Authors:  J U Palo; R B O'Hara; A T Laugen; A Laurila; C R Primmer; J Merilä
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 6.185

  10 in total
  37 in total

1.  The effects of dominance, regular inbreeding and sampling design on Q(ST), an estimator of population differentiation for quantitative traits.

Authors:  Jérôme Goudet; Lucie Büchi
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 4.562

2.  Multivariate QST-FST comparisons: a neutrality test for the evolution of the g matrix in structured populations.

Authors:  Guillaume Martin; Elodie Chapuis; Jérôme Goudet
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-02-03       Impact factor: 4.562

3.  The joint effects of selection and dominance on the QST - FST contrast.

Authors:  Anna W Santure; Jinliang Wang
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-11-03       Impact factor: 4.562

4.  F(ST) and Q(ST) under neutrality.

Authors:  Judith R Miller; Bryan P Wood; Matthew B Hamilton
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-09-09       Impact factor: 4.562

5.  Testing for spatially divergent selection: comparing QST to FST.

Authors:  Michael C Whitlock; Frederic Guillaume
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-08-17       Impact factor: 4.562

6.  Molecular and quantitative genetic differentiation in European populations of Silene latifolia (Caryophyllaceae).

Authors:  Céline Jolivet; Giorgina Bernasconi
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2007-06-12       Impact factor: 4.357

7.  A new method to uncover signatures of divergent and stabilizing selection in quantitative traits.

Authors:  Otso Ovaskainen; Markku Karhunen; Chaozhi Zheng; José Manuel Cano Arias; Juha Merilä
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2011-08-11       Impact factor: 4.562

Review 8.  Q(ST)-F(ST) comparisons: evolutionary and ecological insights from genomic heterogeneity.

Authors:  Tuomas Leinonen; R J Scott McCairns; Robert B O'Hara; Juha Merilä
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 53.242

9.  Connecting the sun to flowering in sunflower adaptation.

Authors:  Benjamin K Blackman; Scott D Michaels; Loren H Rieseberg
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 6.185

10.  Adaptive differentiation of quantitative traits in the globally distributed weed, wild radish (Raphanus raphanistrum).

Authors:  Heather F Sahli; Jeffrey K Conner; Frank H Shaw; Stephen Howe; Allison Lale
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2008-10-14       Impact factor: 4.562

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.