138 research outputs found

    Subpopulation topology of Model Split and Model Tree for ranging from three to five.

    No full text
    <p>In Model Split, subpopulations are split from one ancestral population simultaneously, forming a star-shaped topology. In Model Tree, populations separate at different time points, forming a tree-shaped topology. The time interval between two consecutive dashed lines is 0.5 scaled in units of generations, where is the effective population size.</p

    Accuracy of multiple estimators under Models Split and Tree.

    No full text
    <p>Performance assessment of methods including DIC, STRUCTURE, , Eigenanalysis, Structurama and BAPS. β€œβ€ is the population differentiation statistic estimated by SmartPCA <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0021014#pone.0021014-Patterson1" target="_blank">[11]</a> averaged across 50 data sets. STRUCTURE's performance is evaluated based upon both the original model and the correlated alleles or β€œF” model. Similarly tested is the statistic that relies on STRUCTURE. Eigenanalysis is tested at three significance levels (). Structurama is assessed using both a noninformative prior on and the true value as the starting point. BAPS is evaluated using the individual clustering mode. Blank values in the table indicate that a program did not generate a result.</p

    Accuracy of multiple estimators under Models and .

    No full text
    <p>Evaluation of these methods are performed in the same manner as in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0021014#pone-0021014-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>.</p

    Performance of DIC on one data set simulated under Model Split for each true value, 1,2,3 and 5.

    No full text
    <p>Performance of DIC on one data set simulated under Model Split for each true value, 1,2,3 and 5.</p

    Accuracy of multiple estimators with shorter splitting time among subpopulations.

    No full text
    <p>Evaluation of these methods are performed in the same manner as in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0021014#pone-0021014-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>. Data are simulated under Model Split with the splitting time reduced from to .</p

    Accuracy of multiple estimators under Models and Inbred.

    No full text
    <p>Evaluation of these methods are performed in the same manner as in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0021014#pone-0021014-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>.</p

    Analysis result of data from the Human Genome Diversity Panel.

    No full text
    <p>A. Estimated DIC for different values of . B. Distruct classification bar plot of individuals from the above data set assuming . Each vertical bar represents one individual and each color represents a different cluster.</p

    False positive rate.

    No full text
    <p>False positive rate in a data set of 1000 genes simulated using the coalescent method.</p

    Realized coverage of 95% CI for and Ξ³ when , varies, and there is linkage among sites.

    No full text
    <p>Results for coalescent model simulations with a distribution on , and no selection . .</p

    Example joint distribution of the estimated selection effect and the constraint effect for a particular gene.

    No full text
    <p>Data simulated using PRFREQ. The blue asterisk denotes the true location of parameters.</p
    • …
    corecore