Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27760228›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Mistaken Identity: Another Bias in the Use of Relative Genetic Divergence Measures for Detecting Interspecies Introgression.

Kathryn R Ritz, Mohamed A F Noor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Kathryn R RitzDepartment of Biology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.
Mohamed A F NoorDepartment of Biology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measures of genetic divergence have long been used to identify evolutionary processes operating within and between species. However, recent reviews have described a bias in the use of relative divergence measures towards incorrectly identifying genomic regions that are seemingly immune to introgression. Here, we present a novel and opposite bias of relative divergence measures: misidentifying regions of introgression between sister species. We examine two distinct haplotypes of intermediate frequency within Drosophila pseudoobscura at the DPSX009 locus. One of these haplotypes had lower relative divergence than another to sister species D. persimilis. Although we and others initially presumed one haplotype have spread via introgression between D. pseudoobscura and D. persimilis, absolute divergence measures and individual sequence analysis suggest that haplotype structuring occurred as the result of within-species processes. The potential for this type of misinference may occur with any haplotype that recently spread within a species. We conclude that absolute measures of genetic divergence are necessary for confirming putative regions of introgression.

Indexed as

Gene FlowGenetic VariationAnimalsDrosophilaEvolution, MolecularGenetic DriftGenetic LociHaplotypesSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID27760228
PMCPMC5070774

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.