ArticleBMC genomics2015
How do SNP ascertainment schemes and population demographics affect inferences about population history?
Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ascertainment Bias in Cattle SNP Arrays and Implications for Multibreed Genomic Predictions.Animal genetics · 2026Article
- Genomic Insights into the Origins, Population Structure, and Local Adaptation of Philippine Visayan Native Cattle.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- Patterns of Interploidy Admixture in Polyploid Complexes: Insights From Thymus Sect. Mastichina (Lamiaceae).Molecular ecology · 2026Article
- A new genomic resource to enable standardized surveys of SNPs across the native range of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis).Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Genome-wide local ancestry and the functional consequences of admixture in African and European cattle populations.Heredity · 2025Article
- Tailoring Genomic Selection forGenes · 2024Review
- Reference Genome Choice and Filtering Thresholds Jointly Influence Phylogenomic Analyses.Systematic biology · 2024Article
- Genomic insights into the population history and adaptive traits of Latin American Criollo cattle.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Species Identification of Rehabilitated Critically Endangered Orangutans Through DNA Forensic: Implication for Conservation.Tropical life sciences research · 2024Article
- Modeling of African population history using f-statistics is biased when applying all previously proposed SNP ascertainment schemes.PLoS genetics · 2023Article
- Whole genome sequencing reveals signals of adaptive admixture in Creole cattle.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Genomic variability and population structure of six Colombian cattle breeds.Tropical animal health and production · 2023Article
- Modeling of African population history usingbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Taming the massive genome of Scots pine with PiSy50k, a new genotyping array for conifer research.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2022Article
- Fourth Report on Chicken Genes and Chromosomes 2022.Cytogenetic and genome research · 2022Review
- Deleterious protein-coding variants in diverse cattle breeds of the world.Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE · 2021Article
- Effects of single nucleotide polymorphism ascertainment on population structure inferences.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- In Search of Species-Specific SNPs in a Non-Model Animal (European Bison (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021Article
- How array design creates SNP ascertainment bias.PloS one · 2021Article
- SNP barcodes provide higher resolution than microsatellite markers to measure Plasmodium vivax population genetics.Malaria journal · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe selection of variable sites for inclusion in genomic analyses can influence results, especially when exemplar populations are used to determine polymorphic sites. We tested the impact of ascertainment bias on the inference of population genetic parameters using empirical and simulated data representing the three major continental groups of cattle: European, African, and Indian. We simulated data under three demographic models. Each simulated data set was subjected to three ascertainment schemes: (I) random selection; (II) geographically biased selection; and (III) selection biased toward loci polymorphic in multiple groups. Empirical data comprised samples of 25 individuals representing each continental group. These cattle were genotyped for 47,506 loci from the bovine 50 K SNP panel. We compared the inference of population histories for the empirical and simulated data sets across different ascertainment conditions using F ST and principal components analysis (PCA).
resultsBias toward shared polymorphism across continental groups is apparent in the empirical SNP data. Bias toward uneven levels of within-group polymorphism decreases estimates of F ST between groups. Subpopulation-biased selection of SNPs changes the weighting of principal component axes and can affect inferences about proportions of admixture and population histories using PCA. PCA-based inferences of population relationships are largely congruent across types of ascertainment bias, even when ascertainment bias is strong.
conclusionsAnalyses of ascertainment bias in genomic data have largely been conducted on human data. As genomic analyses are being applied to non-model organisms, and across taxa with deeper divergences, care must be taken to consider the potential for bias in ascertainment of variation to affect inferences. Estimates of F ST , time of separation, and population divergence as estimated by principal components analysis can be misleading if this bias is not taken into account.
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.