ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2023
Avoiding misleading estimates using mtDNA heteroplasmy statistics to study bottleneck size and selection.
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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Mitochondrial DNA Inheritance and Germline Purifying Selection: Insights FromAnnual review of genetics · 2026Review
- Evaluating Selective Quality Control in Mammalian Oogenesis: Evidence and Opportunities.Annual review of genetics · 2025Review
- Age-dependent accumulation of mitochondrial tRNA mutations in mouse kidneys linked to mitochondrial kidney diseases.Nature aging · 2025Article
- Multiple distinct evolutionary mechanisms govern the dynamics of selfish mitochondrial genomes in Caenorhabditis elegans.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Evolution and maintenance of mtDNA gene content across eukaryotes.The Biochemical journal · 2024Review
- Article
- Stochastic organelle genome segregation through Arabidopsis development and reproduction.The New phytologist · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
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
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.