ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2025
Detecting Introgression in Shallow Phylogenies: How Minor Molecular Clock Deviations Lead to Major Inference Errors.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- What has population genomics told us about the dynamics of selection and plant adaptation?Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Review
- A Rarefaction Approach to Identify Local Introgression in a Three Population Tree.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Disentangling Complex Histories of Hybridisation: The Genomic Consequences of Ancient and Recent Introgression in Channel Island Monkeyflowers.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recent theoretical and algorithmic advances in introgression detection, coupled with the growing availability of genome-scale data, have highlighted the widespread occurrence of interspecific gene flow across the tree of life. However, current methods largely depend on the molecular clock assumption-a questionable premise given empirical evidence of substitution rate variation across lineages. While such rate heterogeneity is known to compromise gene flow detection among divergent lineages, its impact on closely related taxa at shallow evolutionary timescales remains poorly understood, likely because these taxa are often assumed to adhere to a molecular clock. To address this gap, we combine theoretical analyses and simulations to evaluate the robustness of widely used site pattern methods (D-statistic and HyDe) to rate variation across phylogenetic timescales. Our results demonstrate that both methods exhibit high sensitivity to even minor deviations from the molecular clock at shallow timescales, complementing previous findings at deeper scales. Specifically, in young phylogenies (with an age of 3 × 105 generations) with small population sizes, weak (17% difference) and moderate (33% difference) rate variation can inflate false-positive rates up to 35% and 100%, respectively, using site pattern counts from a 500 Mb genome. Employing a more distant outgroup intensifies these spurious signals. Our study demonstrates that summary tests for introgression are pervasively vulnerable to minor rate variations and underscores the critical need for advanced methodologies to disentangle genuine introgression from false signals generated by rate heterogeneity.
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.