Literature DB >> 32034821

Confidently identifying the correct K value using the ΔK method: When does K = 2?

Catherine I Cullingham1, Joshua M Miller2, Rhiannon M Peery2, Julian R Dupuis3, René M Malenfant4, Jamieson C Gorrell5, Jasmine K Janes5.   

Abstract

Populations delineated based on genetic data are commonly used for wildlife conservation and management. Many studies use the program structure combined with the ΔK method to identify the most probable number of populations (K). We recently found K = 2 was identified more often when studies used ΔK compared to studies that did not. We suggested two reasons for this: hierarchical population structure leads to underestimation, or the ΔK method does not evaluate K = 1 causing an overestimation. The present contribution aims to develop a better understanding of the limits of the method using one, two and three population simulations across migration scenarios. From these simulations we identified the "best K" using model likelihood and ΔK. Our findings show that mean probability plots and ΔK are unable to resolve the correct number of populations once migration rate exceeds 0.005. We also found a strong bias towards selecting K = 2 using the ΔK method. We used these data to identify the range of values where the ΔK statistic identifies a value of K that is not well supported. Finally, using the simulations and a review of empirical data, we found that the magnitude of ΔK corresponds to the level of divergence between populations. Based on our findings, we suggest researchers should use the ΔK method cautiously; they need to report all relevant data, including the magnitude of ΔK, and an estimate of connectivity for the research community to assess whether meaningful genetic structure exists within the context of management and conservation.
© 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  zzm321990Fzzm321990STzzm321990; genetic structure; migration rate; population structure; ΔK

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32034821     DOI: 10.1111/mec.15374

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Ecol        ISSN: 0962-1083            Impact factor:   6.185


  12 in total

1.  Evidence for serial founder events during the colonization of North America by the yellow fever mosquito, Aedes aegypti.

Authors:  Evlyn Pless; Jeffrey R Powell; Krystal R Seger; Brett Ellis; Andrea Gloria-Soria
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 3.167

2.  Population Structure and Genetic Diversity of the Pepper Weevil (Coleoptera: Curculionidae) Using the COI Barcoding Region.

Authors:  D Catalina Fernández; Sherah L VanLaerhoven; Esteban Rodríguez-Leyva; Y Miles Zhang; Roselyne Labbé
Journal:  J Insect Sci       Date:  2022-01-01       Impact factor: 1.857

3.  A new lineage of Galapagos giant tortoises identified from museum samples.

Authors:  Evelyn L Jensen; Maud C Quinzin; Joshua M Miller; Michael A Russello; Ryan C Garrick; Danielle L Edwards; Scott Glaberman; Ylenia Chiari; Nikos Poulakakis; Washington Tapia; James P Gibbs; Adalgisa Caccone
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2022-02-25       Impact factor: 3.832

4.  A pipeline for effectively developing highly polymorphic simple sequence repeats markers based on multi-sample genomic data.

Authors:  Hui Wang; Shenghan Gao; Yu Liu; Pengcheng Wang; Zhengwang Zhang
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2022-03-06       Impact factor: 2.912

5.  Genetic management on the brink of extinction: sequencing microsatellites does not improve estimates of inbreeding in wild and captive Vancouver Island marmots (Marmota vancouverensis).

Authors:  Kimberley G Barrett; Geneviève Amaral; Melanie Elphinstone; Malcolm L McAdie; Corey S Davis; Jasmine K Janes; John Carnio; Axel Moehrenschlager; Jamieson C Gorrell
Journal:  Conserv Genet       Date:  2022-01-16       Impact factor: 2.538

6.  Landscape Genomics Provides Evidence of Ecotypic Adaptation and a Barrier to Gene Flow at Treeline for the Arctic Foundation Species Eriophorum vaginatum.

Authors:  Elizabeth Stunz; Ned Fetcher; Philip Lavretsky; Jonathon E Mohl; Jianwu Tang; Michael L Moody
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 5.753

7.  Demographic and ecogeographic factors limit wild grapevine spread at the southern edge of its distribution range.

Authors:  Oshrit Rahimi; Noa Ohana-Levi; Hodaya Brauner; Nimrod Inbar; Sariel Hübner; Elyashiv Drori
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2021-05-08       Impact factor: 2.912

Review 8.  The influence of a priori grouping on inference of genetic clusters: simulation study and literature review of the DAPC method.

Authors:  Joshua M Miller; Catherine I Cullingham; Rhiannon M Peery
Journal:  Heredity (Edinb)       Date:  2020-08-04       Impact factor: 3.821

9.  Allopatric and Sympatric Drivers of Speciation in Alviniconcha Hydrothermal Vent Snails.

Authors:  Corinna Breusing; Shannon B Johnson; Verena Tunnicliffe; David A Clague; Robert C Vrijenhoek; Roxanne A Beinart
Journal:  Mol Biol Evol       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 16.240

10.  Limited gene flow and pronounced population genetic structure of Eastern Massasauga (Sistrurus catenatus) in a Midwestern prairie remnant.

Authors:  Whitney J B Anthonysamy; Michael J Dreslik; Sarah J Baker; Mark A Davis; Marlis R Douglas; Michael E Douglas; Christopher A Phillips
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-03-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.