Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29263778›Full record

ArticleMethods in ecology and evolution2017

Identifying consistent allele frequency differences in studies of stratified populations.

R Axel W Wiberg, Oscar E Gaggiotti, Michael B Morrissey, Michael G Ritchie

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in ecology and evolution, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Beyond Fixation: Persistent Genetic Variation Under Intense Selection.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  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.

R Axel W WibergCentre for Biological Diversity Sir Harold Mitchell Building University of St Andrews St Andrews, Scotland United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8074-8670
Oscar E GaggiottiScottish Oceans Institute Gatty Marine Laboratory University of St Andrews East Sands St Andrews, Scotland United Kingdom.
Michael B MorrisseyCentre for Biological Diversity Sir Harold Mitchell Building University of St Andrews St Andrews, Scotland United Kingdom.
Michael G RitchieCentre for Biological Diversity Sir Harold Mitchell Building University of St Andrews St Andrews, Scotland United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With increasing application of pooled-sequencing approaches to population genomics robust methods are needed to accurately quantify allele frequency differences between populations. Identifying consistent differences across stratified populations can allow us to detect genomic regions under selection and that differ between populations with different histories or attributes. Current popular statistical tests are easily implemented in widely available software tools which make them simple for researchers to apply. However, there are potential problems with the way such tests are used, which means that underlying assumptions about the data are frequently violated.These problems are highlighted by simulation of simple but realistic population genetic models of neutral evolution and the performance of different tests are assessed. We present alternative tests (including Generalised Linear Models [GLMs] with quasibinomial error structure) with attractive properties for the analysis of allele frequency differences and re-analyse a published dataset.The simulations show that common statistical tests for consistent allele frequency differences perform poorly, with high false positive rates. Applying tests that do not confound heterogeneity and main effects significantly improves inference. Variation in sequencing coverage likely produces many false positives and re-scaling allele frequencies to counts out of a common value or an effective sample size reduces this effect.Many researchers are interested in identifying allele frequencies that vary consistently across replicates to identify loci underlying phenotypic responses to selection or natural variation in phenotypes. Popular methods that have been suggested for this task perform poorly in simulations. Overall, quasibinomial GLMs perform better and also have the attractive feature of allowing correction for multiple testing by standard procedures and are easily extended to other designs.

Indexed as

allele frequency differencesCMH‐testexperimental evolutionpool‐seqquasibinomial GLMselection

Identifiers

PMID29263778
PMCPMC5726381

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.