Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31988743›Full record

ReviewEcology and evolution2020

A practical introduction to sequentially Markovian coalescent methods for estimating demographic history from genomic data.

Niklas Mather, Samuel M Traves, Simon Y W Ho

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ecology and evolution, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
82citing 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

82 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Niklas MatherSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Sydney Sydney NSW Australia.
Samuel M TravesSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Sydney Sydney NSW Australia.
Simon Y W HoSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Sydney Sydney NSW Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0361-2307

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A common goal of population genomics and molecular ecology is to reconstruct the demographic history of a species of interest. A pair of powerful tools based on the sequentially Markovian coalescent have been developed to infer past population sizes using genome sequences. These methods are most useful when sequences are available for only a limited number of genomes and when the aim is to study ancient demographic events. The results of these analyses can be difficult to interpret accurately, because doing so requires some understanding of their theoretical basis and of their sensitivity to confounding factors. In this practical review, we explain some of the key concepts underpinning the pairwise and multiple sequentially Markovian coalescent methods (PSMC and MSMC, respectively). We relate these concepts to the use and interpretation of these methods, and we explain how the choice of different parameter values by the user can affect the accuracy and precision of the inferences. Based on our survey of 100 PSMC studies and 30 MSMC studies, we describe how the two methods are used in practice. Readers of this article will become familiar with the principles, practice, and interpretation of the sequentially Markovian coalescent for inferring demographic history.

Indexed as

coalescentdemographic historymutation ratepopulation genomicspopulation size

Identifiers

PMID31988743
PMCPMC6972798

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.