Cited by 681Genetic diversity and population structureEvolution and Genetic DynamicsForensic and Genetic Research

Properties of statistical tests of neutrality for DNA polymorphism data

Simonsen, K L, Churchill, G A, Aquadro, C F·1995·Genetics

Abstract

A class of statistical tests based on molecular polymorphism data is studied to determine size and power properties. The class includes Tajima's D statistic as well as the D* and F* tests proposed by Fu and Li. A new method of constructing critical values for these tests is described. Simulations indicate that Tajima's test is generally most powerful against the alternative hypotheses of selective sweep, population bottleneck, and population subdivision, among tests within this class. However, even Tajima's test can detect a selective sweep or bottleneck only if it has occurred within a specific interval of time in the recent past or population subdivision only when it has persisted for a very long time. For greatest power against the particular alternatives studied here, it is better to sequence more alleles than more sites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/genetics/141.1.413

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The SFS of polymorphisms in genomic regions containing hybrid incompatibilities is expected to depart from the genome-wide SFS.

    “Therefore, we might expect the site frequency spectrum (SFS) of polymorphisms in genomic regions containing hybrid incompatibilities to depart from the genome-wide SFS (Braverman et al. 1995; Simonsen et al. 1995).”

    From Finding Hybrid Incompatibilities Using Genome Sequences from Hybrid Populations (2021) · cites this paper as Simonsen et al. 1995

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Simonsen, K. L., Churchill, G. A., & Aquadro, C. F.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Venue
Genetics
Published
1995-09-01
Volume
141
Issue
1
Pages
413-429
ISSN
  • 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-2631
OpenAlex
W2113420705
Cited by
681
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 14 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 15 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 42 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 21
FWCI
9.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (9113307)
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM036431, GM-3643)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
Keywords
neutrality tests, DNA polymorphism, selective sweeps, population bottleneck, population subdivision, statistical power, critical values, molecular evolution
MeSH terms
Computer Simulation, DNA, Models, Genetic, Polymorphism, Genetic, Models, Statistical

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