Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40924022›Full record

ArticleSystematic biology2026

Estimating Waiting Distances between Genealogy Changes under a Multi-Species Extension of the Sequentially Markov Coalescent.

Patrick F McKenzie, Deren A R Eaton

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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

2 authors.

Patrick F McKenzieDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, 1200 Amsterdam Ave. New York, NY 10027, USA.
Deren A R EatonDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia University, 1200 Amsterdam Ave. New York, NY 10027, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5922-2770

Funding

DGE 16-44869National Science Foundation DEB-2046813
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomes are composed of a mosaic of segments inherited from different ancestors, each separated by past recombination events. Consequently, genealogical relationships among multiple genomes vary spatially across different genomic regions. Genealogical variation among unlinked (uncorrelated) genomic regions is well described for either a single population (coalescent) or multiple structured populations (multispecies coalescent). However, the expected similarity among genealogies at linked regions of a genome is less well characterized. Recently, an analytical solution was derived for the distribution of the waiting distance for a change in the genealogical tree spatially across a genome for a single population with constant effective population size. Here, we describe a generalization of this result in terms of the distribution of waiting distances between changes in genealogical trees and topologies for multiple structured populations with branch-specific effective population sizes (i.e., under the multispecies coalescent). We implemented our model in the Python package ipcoal and validated its accuracy against stochastic coalescent simulations. Using a novel likelihood framework, we show that tree and topology-change waiting distances in an ancestral recombination graph can be used to fit species tree model parameters, demonstrating an application of our model for developing new methods for phylogenetic inference. The multi-species sequentially Markov coalescent model presented here represents a major advance for linking local ancestry inference to hierarchical demographic models.

Indexed as

ClassificationModels, GeneticPhylogenyComputer SimulationMarkov ChainsARGconcatalescencegene treephylogenyrecombinationSMCspecies tree

Identifiers

PMID40924022
PMCPMC13016838

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.