ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2014
Characterizing bias in population genetic inferences from low-coverage sequencing data.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 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
51 citing papers in PubMed.
- Identifying adaptive variation in spatially structured populations using low-coverage whole-genome sequencing data.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Hitchhiking Parasites: Unstructured Populations of Bat Ectoparasites Reveal Host-Driven Dispersal.Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- Efficient Estimation of Nucleotide Diversity and Divergence Using Callable Loci (and More).Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Estimation of demography and mutation rates from one million haploid genomes.American journal of human genetics · 2025Article
- Population Genomics of Giant Mice from the Faroe Islands: Hybridization, Colonization, and a Novel Challenge to Identifying Genomic Targets of Selection.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Genome-environment association analysis reveals climate-driven adaptation of chickens.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2025Article
- Genomic evidence for fisheries-induced evolution in Eastern Baltic cod.Science advances · 2025Article
- Recent Origin of a Range-Restricted Species With Subsequent Introgression in its Widespread Congener in the Phyteuma spicatum Group (Campanulaceae).Molecular ecology · 2025Article
- Modeling Biases from Low-Pass Genome Sequencing to Enable Accurate Population Genetic Inferences.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- The genomic footprint of whaling and isolation in fin whale populations.Nature communications · 2023Article
- The Impact of Sample Size and Population History on Observed Mutational Spectra: A Case Study in Human and Chimpanzee Populations.Genome biology and evolution · 2023Article
- Using landscape genomics to delineate future adaptive potential for climate change in the Yosemite toad (Evolutionary applications · 2023Article
- The impact of sequencing depth and relatedness of the reference genome in population genomic studies: A case study with two caddisfly species (Trichoptera, Rhyacophilidae,Ecology and evolution · 2022Article
- Article
- Recommendations for improving statistical inference in population genomics.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
- Demographic Reconstruction of Antarctic Fur Seals Supports the Krill Surplus Hypothesis.Genes · 2022Article
- Performance of methods to detect genetic variants from bisulphite sequencing data in a non-model species.Molecular ecology resources · 2022Article
- Hierarchical genetic structure and implications for conservation of the world's largest salmonid, Hucho taimen.Scientific reports · 2021Article
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
Abstract
The site frequency spectrum (SFS) is of primary interest in population genetic studies, because the SFS compresses variation data into a simple summary from which many population genetic inferences can proceed. However, inferring the SFS from sequencing data is challenging because genotype calls from sequencing data are often inaccurate due to high error rates and if not accounted for, this genotype uncertainty can lead to serious bias in downstream analysis based on the inferred SFS. Here, we compare two approaches to estimate the SFS from sequencing data: one approach infers individual genotypes from aligned sequencing reads and then estimates the SFS based on the inferred genotypes (call-based approach) and the other approach directly estimates the SFS from aligned sequencing reads by maximum likelihood (direct estimation approach). We find that the SFS estimated by the direct estimation approach is unbiased even at low coverage, whereas the SFS by the call-based approach becomes biased as coverage decreases. The direction of the bias in the call-based approach depends on the pipeline to infer genotypes. Estimating genotypes by pooling individuals in a sample (multisample calling) results in underestimation of the number of rare variants, whereas estimating genotypes in each individual and merging them later (single-sample calling) leads to overestimation of rare variants. We characterize the impact of these biases on downstream analyses, such as demographic parameter estimation and genome-wide selection scans. Our work highlights that depending on the pipeline used to infer the SFS, one can reach different conclusions in population genetic inference with the same data set. Thus, careful attention to the analysis pipeline and SFS estimation procedures is vital for population genetic inferences.
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.