Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36317198›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2022

Inference of Gene Flow between Species under Misspecified Models.

Jun Huang, Yuttapong Thawornwattana, Tomáš Flouri, James Mallet, Ziheng Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Phylogenetic networks empower biodiversity research.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. The power of coalescent methods for inferring recent and ancient gene flow in endangered Bactrian camels.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Efficient Bayesian inference under the multispecies coalescent with migration.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Jun HuangSchool of Biomedical Engineering, Capital Medical University, Beijing 100069, P.R. China.ORCID 0000-0002-4196-9729
Yuttapong ThawornwattanaDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138.ORCID 0000-0003-2745-163X
Tomáš FlouriDepartment of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-8474-9507
James MalletDepartment of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138.ORCID 0000-0002-3370-0367
Ziheng YangDepartment of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3351-7981

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R01356X/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/T003502/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic sequence data provide a rich source of information about the history of species divergence and interspecific hybridization or introgression. Despite recent advances in genomics and statistical methods, it remains challenging to infer gene flow, and as a result, one may have to estimate introgression rates and times under misspecified models. Here we use mathematical analysis and computer simulation to examine estimation bias and issues of interpretation when the model of gene flow is misspecified in analysis of genomic datasets, for example, if introgression is assigned to the wrong lineages. In the case of two species, we establish a correspondence between the migration rate in the continuous migration model and the introgression probability in the introgression model. When gene flow occurs continuously through time but in the analysis is assumed to occur at a fixed time point, common evolutionary parameters such as species divergence times are surprisingly well estimated. However, the time of introgression tends to be estimated towards the recent end of the period of continuous gene flow. When introgression events are assigned incorrectly to the parental or daughter lineages, introgression times tend to collapse onto species divergence times, with introgression probabilities underestimated. Overall, our analyses suggest that the simple introgression model is useful for extracting information concerning between-specific gene flow and divergence even when the model may be misspecified. However, for reliable inference of gene flow it is important to include multiple samples per species, in particular, from hybridizing species.

Indexed as

Gene FlowGenomicsComputer SimulationBayesian phylogenetics and phylogeography (BPP)gene flowintrogressionmodel misspecificationmultispecies coalescentspecies tree

Identifiers

PMID36317198
PMCPMC9729068

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.