ArticleGenetics2017
Accounting for Sampling Error in Genetic Eigenvalues Using Random Matrix Theory.
Article in Genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cis-regulation of gene expression between sexes and life stages in Rumex hastatulus.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Regularized regression can improve estimates of multivariate selection in the face of multicollinearity and limited data.Evolution letters · 2024Article
- Article
- Using inbreeding to test the contribution of non-additive genetic effects to additive genetic variance: a case study inProceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Evolvability and constraint in the evolution of three-dimensional flower morphology.American journal of botany · 2022Article
- Causes of variability in estimates of mutational variance from mutation accumulation experiments.Genetics · 2022Article
- The contribution of mutation and selection to multivariate quantitative genetic variance in an outbred population ofProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
- Predicting the Evolution of Sexual Dimorphism in Gene Expression.Molecular biology and evolution · 2021Article
- A note on measuring natural selection on principal component scores.Evolution letters · 2018Article
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
The distribution of genetic variance in multivariate phenotypes is characterized by the empirical spectral distribution of the eigenvalues of the genetic covariance matrix. Empirical estimates of genetic eigenvalues from random effects linear models are known to be overdispersed by sampling error, where large eigenvalues are biased upward, and small eigenvalues are biased downward. The overdispersion of the leading eigenvalues of sample covariance matrices have been demonstrated to conform to the Tracy-Widom (TW) distribution. Here we show that genetic eigenvalues estimated using restricted maximum likelihood (REML) in a multivariate random effects model with an unconstrained genetic covariance structure will also conform to the TW distribution after empirical scaling and centering. However, where estimation procedures using either REML or MCMC impose boundary constraints, the resulting genetic eigenvalues tend not be TW distributed. We show how using confidence intervals from sampling distributions of genetic eigenvalues without reference to the TW distribution is insufficient protection against mistaking sampling error as genetic variance, particularly when eigenvalues are small. By scaling such sampling distributions to the appropriate TW distribution, the critical value of the TW statistic can be used to determine if the magnitude of a genetic eigenvalue exceeds the sampling error for each eigenvalue in the spectral distribution of a given genetic covariance matrix.
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.