Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36951404›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2023

Avoiding misleading estimates using mtDNA heteroplasmy statistics to study bottleneck size and selection.

Konstantinos Giannakis, Amanda K Broz, Daniel B Sloan, Iain G Johnston

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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.

Konstantinos GiannakisDepartment of Mathematics, University of Bergen, 5007 Bergen, Norway.
Amanda K BrozDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA.
Daniel B SloanDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA.
Iain G JohnstonDepartment of Mathematics, University of Bergen, 5007 Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-8559-3519

Funding

Causes of Extreme Mitochondrial Mutation Rate VariationR01GM118046 · NIGMS · COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI SLOAN, DANIEL BENJAMIN · 2017 to 2021
$1.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM118046NIH HHS R01 GM118046
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mitochondrial DNA heteroplasmy samples can shed light on vital developmental and genetic processes shaping mitochondrial DNA populations. The sample means and sample variance of a set of heteroplasmy observations are typically used both to estimate bottleneck sizes and to perform fits to the theoretical "Kimura" distribution in seeking evidence for mitochondrial DNA selection. However, each of these applications raises problems. Sample statistics do not generally provide optimal fits to the Kimura distribution and so can give misleading results in hypothesis testing, including false positive signals of selection. Using sample variance can give misleading results for bottleneck size estimates, particularly for small samples. These issues can and do lead to false positive results for mitochondrial DNA mechanisms-all published experimental datasets we re-analyzed, reported as displaying departures from the Kimura model, do not in fact give evidence for such departures. Here we outline a maximum likelihood approach that is simple to implement computationally and addresses all of these issues. We advocate the use of maximum likelihood fits and explicit hypothesis tests, not fits and Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests via summary statistics, for ongoing work with mitochondrial DNA heteroplasmy.

Indexed as

DNA, MitochondrialHeteroplasmyLikelihood FunctionsMitochondriaDNA, MitochondrialbottleneckheteroplasmyKimura distributionmtDNAselectionstatistical genetics

Identifiers

PMID36951404
PMCPMC10234379

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.