ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2025
The Impact of Sequencing and Genotyping Errors on Bayesian Analysis of Genomic Data under the Multispecies Coalescent Model.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- On the robustness of Bayesian inference of gene flow to intragenic recombination and natural selection.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
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
The multispecies coalescent (MSC) model accounts for genealogical fluctuations across the genome and provides a framework for analyzing genomic data from closely related species to estimate species phylogenies and divergence times, infer interspecific gene flow, and delineate species boundaries. As the MSC model assumes correct sequences, sequencing and genotyping errors at low read depths may be a serious concern. Here, we use computer simulation to assess the impact of genotyping errors in phylogenomic data on Bayesian inference of the species tree and population parameters such as species split times, population sizes, and the rate of gene flow. The base-calling error rate is extremely influential. At the low rate of e = 0.001 (Phred score of 30), estimation of species trees and population parameters are little affected by genotyping errors even at the low depth of ∼3×. At high error rates (e = 0.005 or 0.01) and low depths (less than 10×), genotyping errors can reduce the power of species tree estimation, and introduce biases in estimates of population sizes, species divergence times, and the rate of gene flow. Treating heterozygotes in the sequences as missing data (ambiguities) may reduce the impact of genotyping errors. Our simulation suggests that it is preferable in terms of inference precision and accuracy to sequence a few samples at high depths rather than many samples at low depths.
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.