Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26967525›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2016

Incomplete Lineage Sorting and Hybridization Statistics for Large-Scale Retroposon Insertion Data.

Andrej Kuritzin, Tabea Kischka, Jürgen Schmitz, Gennady Churakov

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 53 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Uncovering the enigmatic evolution of bears in greater depth: The hybrid origin of the Asiatic black bear.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Recently IntegratedGenes · 2022
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Andrej KuritzinDepartment of System Analysis, Saint Petersburg State Institute of Technology, St. Petersburg, Russia.
Tabea KischkaInstitute of Experimental Pathology (ZMBE), University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Jürgen SchmitzInstitute of Experimental Pathology (ZMBE), University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Gennady ChurakovInstitute of Experimental Pathology (ZMBE), University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
University of Münster · DESt. Petersburg State Technological Institute · RU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ancient retroposon insertions can be used as virtually homoplasy-free markers to reconstruct the phylogenetic history of species. Inherited, orthologous insertions in related species offer reliable signals of a common origin of the given species. One prerequisite for such a phylogenetically informative insertion is that the inserted element was fixed in the ancestral population before speciation; if not, polymorphically inserted elements may lead to random distributions of presence/absence states during speciation and possibly to apparently conflicting reconstructions of their ancestry. Fortunately, such misleading fixed cases are relatively rare but nevertheless, need to be considered. Here, we present novel, comprehensive statistical models applicable for (1) analyzing any pattern of rare genomic changes, (2) testing and differentiating conflicting phylogenetic reconstructions based on rare genomic changes caused by incomplete lineage sorting or/and ancestral hybridization, and (3) differentiating between search strategies involving genome information from one or several lineages. When the new statistics are applied, in non-conflicting cases a minimum of three elements present in both of two species and absent in a third group are considered significant support (p<0.05) for the branching of the third from the other two, if all three of the given species are screened equally for genome or experimental data. Five elements are necessary for significant support (p<0.05) if a diagnostic locus derived from only one of three species is screened, and no conflicting markers are detected. Most potentially conflicting patterns can be evaluated for their significance and ancestral hybridization can be distinguished from incomplete lineage sorting by considering symmetric or asymmetric distribution of rare genomic changes among possible tree configurations. Additionally, we provide an R-application to make the new KKSC insertion significance test available for the scientific community at http://retrogenomics.uni-muenster.de:3838/KKSC_significance_test/.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticModels, StatisticalAlgorithmsBase SequenceComputer SimulationDNA Transposable ElementsHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHybridization, GeneticMolecular Sequence DataMutagenesis, InsertionalRetroelementsSoftwareDNA Transposable ElementsRetroelements

Identifiers

PMID26967525
PMCPMC4788455
OpenAlexW2296378324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.