ArticleMolecular ecology resources2026
Improving Malaria Parasite Gene Flow Inference Under Sparse Spatial Sampling.
Article in Molecular ecology resources, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Estimating malaria parasite migration is crucial for informing elimination strategies, particularly by identifying regions with higher parasite migration that may serve as transmission sources and intervention targets. Methods that infer spatial variations in gene flow from georeferenced genetic data, including Estimated Effective Migration Surfaces (EEMS) and related approaches such as estimating Migration And Population-size Surfaces (MAPS), have become widely used to visualize barriers and corridors of organism movement. However, when sampling locations are sparse or unevenly distributed, spatial gene-flow maps can contain artefacts that are difficult to interpret, and methods such as EEMS provide posterior probability summaries that indicate whether inferred migration rates are statistically supported by the genomic data. However, these summaries do not directly capture whether a spatially inferred feature, such as a migration barrier or corridor, lies in a region with sufficient sampling locations to be geographically reliable. A high posterior probability in a sparsely sampled region reflects model confidence given available data, not spatial sampling adequacy. In this study, we developed a sample location-aware (SLA) filtering workflow that applies topological skeletons and kernel density estimation to assess sample density for each contour and filter out areas with lower sample density. This workflow can be applied to any gene-flow inference approach that produces spatially explicit migration features (e.g., contours, surfaces, or high/low-migration regions) from genotype data and sample coordinates. Using simulated genomic data and different barrier configurations under systematic site subsampling scenarios, we show that posterior-only filtering can retain spurious barrier features, whereas SLA filtering consistently increases the precision of inferred low-migration regions across sample sites. In an empirical case study of Plasmodium falciparum from Cambodia, SLA filtering produced more stable estimates of parasite migration patterns under location subsampling than posterior probability filtering alone. These results demonstrate that incorporating an explicit measure of geographic sampling density around each inferred migration feature improves the reliability and interpretability of spatial gene-flow migration patterns for malaria parasites and provides a general diagnostic and filtering approach for a broad class of georeferenced population-genetic migration mapping methods.
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.