Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,806

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Microsatellite Null Alleles and Estimation of Population Differentiation

Open access
Chapuis, Marie-Pierre, Estoup, Arnaud·2007·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Abstract

Microsatellite null alleles are commonly encountered in population genetics studies, yet little is known about their impact on the estimation of population differentiation. Computer simulations based on the coalescent were used to investigate the evolutionary dynamics of null alleles, their impact on F(ST) and genetic distances, and the efficiency of estimators of null allele frequency. Further, we explored how the existing method for correcting genotype data for null alleles performed in estimating F(ST) and genetic distances, and we compared this method with a new method proposed here (for F(ST) only). Null alleles were likely to be encountered in populations with a large effective size, with an unusually high mutation rate in the flanking regions, and that have diverged from the population from which the cloned allele state was drawn and the primers designed. When populations were significantly differentiated, F(ST) and genetic distances were overestimated in the presence of null alleles. Frequency of null alleles was estimated precisely with the algorithm presented in Dempster et al. (1977). The conventional method for correcting genotype data for null alleles did not provide an accurate estimate of F(ST) and genetic distances. However, the use of the genetic distance of Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards (1967) corrected by the conventional method gave better estimates than those obtained without correction. F(ST) estimation from corrected genotype frequencies performed well when restricted to visible allele sizes. Both the proposed method and the traditional correction method have been implemented in a program that is available free of charge at http://www.montpellier.inra.fr/URLB/. We used 2 published microsatellite data sets based on original and redesigned pairs of primers to empirically confirm our simulation results.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/molbev/msl191

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Chapuis, M.-P., & Estoup, A.
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Published
2006-12-05
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
621-631
ISSN
  • 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-1719
OpenAlex
W2158364367
Cited by
2,806
References
1
FWCI
27.04
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

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.