The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Multi-locus inference of population structure: a comparison between single nucleotide polymorphisms and microsatellites
Open accessAbstract
Although growing numbers of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and microsatellites (short tandem repeat polymorphisms or STRPs) are used to infer population structure, their relative properties in this context remain poorly understood. SNPs and STRPs mutate differently, suggesting multi-locus genotypes at these loci might differ in ability to detect population structure. Here, we use coalescent simulations to measure the power of sets of SNPs and STRPs to identify population structure. To maximize the applicability of our results to empirical studies, we focus on the popular STRUCTURE analysis and evaluate the role of several biological and practical factors in the detection of population structure. We find that: (1) fewer unlinked STRPs than SNPs are needed to detect structure at recent divergence times <0.3 Ne generations; (2) accurate estimation of the number of populations requires many fewer STRPs than SNPs; (3) for both marker types, declines in power due to modest gene flow (Nem=1.0) are largely negated by increasing marker number; (4) variation in the STRP mutational model affects power modestly; (5) SNP haplotypes (θ=1, no recombination) provide power comparable with STRP loci (θ=10); (6) ascertainment schemes that select highly variable STRP or SNP loci increase power to detect structure, though ascertained data may not be suitable to other inference; and (7) when samples are drawn from an admixed population and one of its parent populations, the reduction in power to detect two populations is greater for STRPs than SNPs. These results should assist the design of multi-locus studies to detect population structure in nature.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Population Structure and Eigenanalysis
Patterson, N., Price, A. L., & Reich, D. (2006) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.0020190 · Cited by 5,280
Use of Unlinked Genetic Markers to Detect Population Stratification in Association Studies
Pritchard, J. K., & Rosenberg, N. A. (1999) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1086/302449 · Cited by 1,198
SNPs in ecology, evolution and conservation
Morin, P. A., Luikart, G., Wayne, R. K., & the SNP workshop group (2004) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2004.01.009 · Cited by 1,080
The effects of human population structure on large genetic association studies
Marchini, J., Cardon, L. R., Phillips, M. S., & Donnelly, P. (2004) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1337 · Cited by 869
Cited by
SNP ascertainment bias in population genetic analyses: Why it is important, and how to correct it
Lachance, J., & Tishkoff, S. A. (2013) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.201300014 · Cited by 398
Fischer, M. C., Rellstab, C., Leuzinger, M., Roumet, M., Gugerli, F., Shimizu, K. K., Holderegger, R., & Widmer, A. (2017) · BMC Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12864-016-3459-7 · Cited by 283
Assessment of coyote–wolf–dog admixture using ancestry‐informative diagnostic SNP s
Monzón, J., Kays, R., & Dykhuizen, D. E. (2014) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/mec.12570 · Cited by 92
Basto, M. P., Santos-Reis, M., Simões, L., Grilo, C., Cardoso, L., Cortes, H., Bruford, M. W., & Fernandes, C. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0145165 · Cited by 28
Metadata
- Authors
- Haasl, R. J., & Payseur, B. A.
- Venue
- Heredity
- Published
- 2010-03-24
- Volume
- 106
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 158-171
- ISSN
- 0018-067X (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2540
- OpenAlex
- W2148794462
- Cited by
- 197
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 5.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Multi-locus inference of population structure: a comparison between single nucleotide polymorphisms and microsatellites. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/hdy.2010.21
- The paper
- Haasl, R. J., & Payseur, B. A. (2011). Multi-locus inference of population structure: a comparison between single nucleotide polymorphisms and microsatellites. Heredity. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2010.21
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.