Cited by 169Evolution and Genetic DynamicsGenetic diversity and population structureGenomics and Phylogenetic Studies

Context Dependence, Ancestral Misidentification, and Spurious Signatures of Natural Selection

Open access
Hernandez, R. D., Williamson, S. H., Bustamante, C. D.·2007·Molecular Biology and Evolution

Abstract

Population genetic analyses often use polymorphism data from one species, and orthologous genomic sequences from closely related outgroup species. These outgroup sequences are frequently used to identify ancestral alleles at segregating sites and to compare the patterns of polymorphism and divergence. Inherent in such studies is the assumption of parsimony, which posits that the ancestral state of each single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) is the allele that matches the orthologous site in the outgroup sequence, and that all nucleotide substitutions between species have been observed. This study tests the effect of violating the parsimony assumption when mutation rates vary across sites and over time. Using a context-dependent mutation model that accounts for elevated mutation rates at CpG dinucleotides, increased propensity for transitional versus transversional mutations, as well as other directional and contextual mutation biases estimated along the human lineage, we show (using both simulations and a theoretical model) that enough unobserved substitutions could have occurred since the divergence of human and chimpanzee to cause many statistical tests to spuriously reject neutrality. Moreover, using both the chimpanzee and rhesus macaque genomes to parsimoniously identify ancestral states causes a large fraction of the data to be removed while not completely alleviating problem. By constructing a novel model of the context-dependent mutation process, we can correct polymorphism data for the effect of ancestral misidentification using a single outgroup.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/molbev/msm108

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hernandez, R. D., Williamson, S. H., & Bustamante, C. D.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Published
2007-04-18
Volume
24
Issue
8
Pages
1792-1800
ISSN
  • 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-1719
OpenAlex
W2135576052
Cited by
169
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Molecular Biology and Evolution (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Keywords
transition-transversion bias, mutation rate heterogeneity, human-chimpanzee divergence, single nucleotide polymorphisms, neutrality tests
MeSH terms
Animals, Pan troglodytes, Genetics, Population, Humans, Macaca mulatta, Mutation, Selection, Genetic, Genetic Variation, Evolution, Molecular, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide

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