Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33406072›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2021

Sampling bias and model choice in continuous phylogeography: Getting lost on a random walk.

Antanas Kalkauskas, Umberto Perron, Yuxuan Sun, Nick Goldman, Guy Baele, Stephane Guindon, Nicola De Maio

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing 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

55 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Comparative performance of viral landscape phylogeography approaches.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  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

7 authors.

Antanas KalkauskasEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9113-5300
Umberto PerronEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-8003-6545
Yuxuan SunEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6861-3362
Nick GoldmanEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, United Kingdom.
Guy BaeleDepartment of Microbiology, Immunology and Transplantation, Rega Institute, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-1915-7732
Stephane GuindonDepartment of Computer Science, LIRMM, CNRS and Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
Nicola De MaioEuropean Molecular Biology Laboratory, European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1776-8564

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phylogeographic inference allows reconstruction of past geographical spread of pathogens or living organisms by integrating genetic and geographic data. A popular model in continuous phylogeography-with location data provided in the form of latitude and longitude coordinates-describes spread as a Brownian motion (Brownian Motion Phylogeography, BMP) in continuous space and time, akin to similar models of continuous trait evolution. Here, we show that reconstructions using this model can be strongly affected by sampling biases, such as the lack of sampling from certain areas. As an attempt to reduce the effects of sampling bias on BMP, we consider the addition of sequence-free samples from under-sampled areas. While this approach alleviates the effects of sampling bias, in most scenarios this will not be a viable option due to the need for prior knowledge of an outbreak's spatial distribution. We therefore consider an alternative model, the spatial Λ-Fleming-Viot process (ΛFV), which has recently gained popularity in population genetics. Despite the ΛFV's robustness to sampling biases, we find that the different assumptions of the ΛFV and BMP models result in different applicabilities, with the ΛFV being more appropriate for scenarios of endemic spread, and BMP being more appropriate for recent outbreaks or colonizations.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticSelection BiasBayes TheoremComputational BiologyDisease OutbreaksFlavivirusFlavivirus InfectionsGenetics, PopulationHumansMarkov ChainsPhylogeography

Identifiers

PMID33406072
PMCPMC7815209

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.