Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27731502›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of animal ecology2017

Accounting for genetic differences among unknown parents in microevolutionary studies: how to include genetic groups in quantitative genetic animal models.

Matthew E Wolak, Jane M Reid

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of animal ecology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Population and evolutionary dynamics in spatially structured seasonally varying environments.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2018
    Review
  18. 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

2 authors.

Matthew E WolakInstitute of Biological and Environmental Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Zoology Building, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7962-0071
Jane M ReidInstitute of Biological and Environmental Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Zoology Building, Tillydrone Avenue, Aberdeen AB24 2TZ, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantifying and predicting microevolutionary responses to environmental change requires unbiased estimation of quantitative genetic parameters in wild populations. 'Animal models', which utilize pedigree data to separate genetic and environmental effects on phenotypes, provide powerful means to estimate key parameters and have revolutionized quantitative genetic analyses of wild populations. However, pedigrees collected in wild populations commonly contain many individuals with unknown parents. When unknown parents are non-randomly associated with genetic values for focal traits, animal model parameter estimates can be severely biased. Yet, such bias has not previously been highlighted and statistical methods designed to minimize such biases have not been implemented in evolutionary ecology. We first illustrate how the occurrence of non-random unknown parents in population pedigrees can substantially bias animal model predictions of breeding values and estimates of additive genetic variance, and create spurious temporal trends in predicted breeding values in the absence of local selection. We then introduce 'genetic group' methods, which were developed in agricultural science, and explain how these methods can minimize bias in quantitative genetic parameter estimates stemming from genetic heterogeneity among individuals with unknown parents. We summarize the conceptual foundations of genetic group animal models and provide extensive, step-by-step tutorials that demonstrate how to fit such models in a variety of software programs. Furthermore, we provide new functions in r that extend current software capabilities and provide a standardized approach across software programs to implement genetic group methods. Beyond simply alleviating bias, genetic group animal models can directly estimate new parameters pertaining to key biological processes. We discuss one such example, where genetic group methods potentially allow the microevolutionary consequences of local selection to be distinguished from effects of immigration and resulting gene flow. We highlight some remaining limitations of genetic group models and discuss opportunities for further development and application in evolutionary ecology. We suggest that genetic group methods should no longer be overlooked by evolutionary ecologists, but should become standard components of the toolkit for animal model analyses of wild population data sets.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionGenetic VariationModels, GeneticAnimalsComputer SimulationGenetics, PopulationParentsPedigreeASRemlbase populationdispersalheritabilityMCMCglmmnadivnumerator relationship matrixphantom parentstotal additive genetic effectsWOMBAT

Identifiers

PMID27731502
PMCPMC5217070

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.