Literature DB >> 28028941

The computer program structure for assigning individuals to populations: easy to use but easier to misuse.

Jinliang Wang1.   

Abstract

The computer program Structure implements a Bayesian method, based on a population genetics model, to assign individuals to their source populations using genetic marker data. It is widely applied in the fields of ecology, evolutionary biology, human genetics and conservation biology for detecting hidden genetic structures, inferring the most likely number of populations (K), assigning individuals to source populations and estimating admixture and migration rates. Recently, several simulation studies repeatedly concluded that the program yields erroneous inferences when samples from different populations are highly unbalanced in size. Analysing both simulated and empirical data sets, this study confirms that Structure indeed yields poor individual assignments to source populations and gives frequently incorrect estimates of K when sampling is unbalanced. However, this poor performance is mainly caused by the adoption of the default ancestry prior, which assumes all source populations contribute equally to the pooled sample of individuals. When the alternative ancestry prior, which allows for unequal representations of the source populations by the sample, is adopted, accurate individual assignments could be obtained even if sampling is highly unbalanced. The alternative prior also improves the inference of K by two estimators, albeit the improvement is not as much as that in individual assignments to populations. For the difficult case of many populations and unbalanced sampling, a rarely used parameter combination of the alternative ancestry prior, an initial ALPHA value much smaller than the default and the uncorrelated allele frequency model is required for Structure to yield accurate inferences. I conclude that Structure is easy to use but is easier to misuse because of its complicated genetic model and many parameter (prior) options which may not be obvious to choose, and suggest using multiple plausible models (parameters) and K estimators in conducting comparative and exploratory Structure analysis.
© 2016 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  admixture; genetic differentiation; genetic structure; markers; population clustering

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28028941     DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.12650

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Ecol Resour        ISSN: 1755-098X            Impact factor:   7.090


  46 in total

1.  The protected tree Dimorphandra wilsonii (Fabaceae) is a population of inter-specific hybrids: recommendations for conservation in the Brazilian Cerrado/Atlantic Forest ecotone.

Authors:  André Carneiro Muniz; José Pires Lemos-Filho; Helena Augusta Souza; Rafaela Cabral Marinho; Renata Santiago Buzatti; Myriam Heuertz; Maria Bernadete Lovato
Journal:  Ann Bot       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 4.357

2.  Replicated anthropogenic hybridisations reveal parallel patterns of admixture in marine mussels.

Authors:  Alexis Simon; Christine Arbiol; Einar Eg Nielsen; Jérôme Couteau; Rossana Sussarellu; Thierry Burgeot; Ismaël Bernard; Joop W P Coolen; Jean-Baptiste Lamy; Stéphane Robert; Maria Skazina; Petr Strelkov; Henrique Queiroga; Ibon Cancio; John J Welch; Frédérique Viard; Nicolas Bierne
Journal:  Evol Appl       Date:  2019-11-22       Impact factor: 5.183

3.  Origin of a High-Latitude Population of Aedes aegypti in Washington, DC.

Authors:  Andrea Gloria-Soria; Andrew Lima; Diane D Lovin; Joanne M Cunningham; David W Severson; Jeffrey R Powell
Journal:  Am J Trop Med Hyg       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 2.345

4.  Potential limits to the benefits of admixture during biological invasion.

Authors:  Brittany S Barker; Janelle E Cocio; Samantha R Anderson; Joseph E Braasch; Feng A Cang; Heather D Gillette; Katrina M Dlugosch
Journal:  Mol Ecol       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 6.185

5.  Admixture on the northern front: population genomics of range expansion in the white-footed mouse (Peromyscus leucopus) and secondary contact with the deer mouse (Peromyscus maniculatus).

Authors:  A Garcia-Elfring; R D H Barrett; M Combs; T J Davies; J Munshi-South; V Millien
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2017-09-13       Impact factor: 3.821

6.  Different population size change and migration histories created genetic diversity of three oaks in Tokai region, central Japan.

Authors:  Ichiro Tamaki; Tomohiro Obora; Takafumi Ohsawa; Asako Matsumoto; Yoko Saito; Yuji Ide
Journal:  J Plant Res       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 2.629

7.  Contrasting genetic signal of recolonization after rainforest fragmentation in African trees with different dispersal abilities.

Authors:  Rosalía Piñeiro; Olivier J Hardy; Carolina Tovar; Shyam Gopalakrishnan; Filipe Garrett Vieira; M Thomas P Gilbert
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Evidence of population structuring following population genetic analyses of Fasciola hepatica from Argentina.

Authors:  Nicola J Beesley; Elizabeth Attree; Severo Vázquez-Prieto; Román Vilas; Esperanza Paniagua; Florencio M Ubeira; Oscar Jensen; Cesar Pruzzo; José D Álvarez; Jorge Bruno Malandrini; Hugo Solana; Jane E Hodgkinson
Journal:  Int J Parasitol       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.981

9.  Variable levels of introgression between the endangered Podarcis carbonelli and highly divergent congeneric species.

Authors:  Pierre-André Crochet; Catarina Pinho; Guilherme Caeiro-Dias; Alan Brelsford; Antigoni Kaliontzopoulou; Mariana Meneses-Ribeiro
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2020-11-16       Impact factor: 3.821

10.  Genetic signature of the natural gene pool of Tilia cordata Mill. in Lithuania: Compound evolutionary and anthropogenic effects.

Authors:  Darius Danusevičius; Rūta Kembrytė; Jurata Buchovska; Virgilijus Baliuckas; Darius Kavaliauskas
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-05-01       Impact factor: 2.912

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.