ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2010
Inference of population history by coupling exploratory and model-driven phylogeographic analyses.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Mixing rates in weakly differentiated stocks of greater amberjack (Seriola dumerili) in the Gulf of Mexico.Genetica · 2018Article
- Article
- Identification of Eastern United States Reticulitermes Termite Species via PCR-RFLP, Assessed Using Training and Test Data.Insects · 2015Article
- Naturally rare versus newly rare: demographic inferences on two timescales inform conservation of Galápagos giant tortoises.Ecology and evolution · 2015Article
- Challenges in analysis and interpretation of microsatellite data for population genetic studies.Ecology and evolution · 2014Review
- Nuclear gene phylogeography using PHASE: dealing with unresolved genotypes, lost alleles, and systematic bias in parameter estimation.BMC evolutionary biology · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding the nature, timing and geographic context of historical events and population processes that shaped the spatial distribution of genetic diversity is critical for addressing questions relating to speciation, selection, and applied conservation management. Cladistic analysis of gene trees has been central to phylogeography, but when coupled with approaches that make use of different components of the information carried by DNA sequences and their frequencies, the strength and resolution of these inferences can be improved. However, assessing concordance of inferences drawn using different analytical methods or genetic datasets, and integrating their outcomes, can be challenging. Here we overview the strengths and limitations of different types of genetic data, analysis methods, and approaches to historical inference. We then turn our attention to the potentially synergistic interactions among widely-used and emerging phylogeographic analyses, and discuss some of the ways that spatial and temporal concordance among inferences can be assessed. We close this review with a brief summary and outlook on future research directions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.