ArticleEcology and evolution2019
Landscape genetic inferences vary with sampling scenario for a pond-breeding amphibian.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Functional connectivity patterns of the Giant Toad Rhinella horribilis in anthropogenically modified landscapes.PloS one · 2025Article
- An evaluation of isolation by distance and isolation by resistance on genetic structure of the Persian squirrel (Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- The effect of sampling density and study area size on landscape genetics inferences for the Mississippi slimy salamander (Ecology and evolution · 2021Article
- Landscape genetic inferences vary with sampling scenario for a pond-breeding amphibian.Ecology and evolution · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A critical decision in landscape genetic studies is whether to use individuals or populations as the sampling unit. This decision affects the time and cost of sampling and may affect ecological inference. We analyzed 334 Columbia spotted frogs at 8 microsatellite loci across 40 sites in northern Idaho to determine how inferences from landscape genetic analyses would vary with sampling design. At all sites, we compared a proportion available sampling scheme (PASS), in which all samples were used, to resampled datasets of 2-11 individuals. Additionally, we compared a population sampling scheme (PSS) to an individual sampling scheme (ISS) at 18 sites with sufficient sample size. We applied an information theoretic approach with both restricted maximum likelihood and maximum likelihood estimation to evaluate competing landscape resistance hypotheses. We found that PSS supported low-density forest when restricted maximum likelihood was used, but a combination model of most variables when maximum likelihood was used. We also saw variations when AIC was used compared to BIC. ISS supported this model as well as additional models when testing hypotheses of land cover types that create the greatest resistance to gene flow for Columbia spotted frogs. Increased sampling density and study extent, seen by comparing PSS to PASS, showed a change in model support. As number of individuals increased, model support converged at 7-9 individuals for ISS to PSS. ISS may be useful to increase study extent and sampling density, but may lack power to provide strong support for the correct model with microsatellite datasets. Our results highlight the importance of additional research on sampling design effects on landscape genetics inference.
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.