Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 117

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Founders, Drift, and Infidelity: The Relationship between Y Chromosome Diversity and Patrilineal Surnames

King, T. E., Jobling, M. A.·2009·Molecular Biology and Evolution
DOI 10.1093/molbev/msp022PMC PMC2668828
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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/msp022

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

FIG. 1.— Haplogroup frequencies and gene diversities in 40 surnames and controls. (a) Tree showing phylogenetic relationships between haplogroups observed in this study, with mutation names given on branches. Unobserved haplogroups and associated markers are not shown, and shorthand names for haplogroups are explained in Materials and Methods. (b) Haplogroup frequencies, diversities, and summary of descent cluster findings. Each surname is followed by its abbreviation. Surname derivations are coded as follows—A: ambiguous/unknown; L: locative; N: nickname; O: occupational; P: patronymic/matronymic; and T: topographic. The total number of bearers of each surname in 1996 is given as the sum of bearers of all analyzed spelling variants—see supplementary table, Supplementary Material online. h: gene diversity. The number of clusters observed per surname is not shown, because this is sample-size dependent.
FIG. 1.— Haplogroup frequencies and gene diversities in 40 surnames and controls. (a) Tree showing phylogenetic relationships between haplogroups observed in this study, with mutation names given on branches. Unobserved haplogroups and associated markers are not shown, and shorthand names for haplogroups are explained in Materials and Methods. (b) Haplogroup frequencies, diversities, and summary of descent cluster findings. Each surname is followed by its abbreviation. Surname derivations are coded as follows—A: ambiguous/unknown; L: locative; N: nickname; O: occupational; P: patronymic/matronymic; and T: topographic. The total number of bearers of each surname in 1996 is given as the sum of bearers of all analyzed spelling variants—see supplementary table, Supplementary Material online. h: gene diversity. The number of clusters observed per surname is not shown, because this is sample-size dependent.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIG. 2.— Relationships among 40 different surnames represented by MDS. (a) MDS analysis of 40 surnames (represented by abbreviations as shown in fig. 1) and controls (red star), based on pairwise FST calculated from haplogroup frequencies. White circle symbols indicate surnames not significantly different (P ≥ 0.05) from controls. Around the MDS plot are pie charts for selected surnames and controls, indicating haplogroup frequencies by sector areas colored according to the key below right. (b) MDS analysis of 40 surnames (represented by abbreviations as shown in fig. 1) and controls (red star), based on pairwise RST calculated from Y-STR haplotype frequencies. White circle symbols indicate surnames not significantly different (P ≥ 0.05) from controls.
FIG. 2.— Relationships among 40 different surnames represented by MDS. (a) MDS analysis of 40 surnames (represented by abbreviations as shown in fig. 1) and controls (red star), based on pairwise FST calculated from haplogroup frequencies. White circle symbols indicate surnames not significantly different (P ≥ 0.05) from controls. Around the MDS plot are pie charts for selected surnames and controls, indicating haplogroup frequencies by sector areas colored according to the key below right. (b) MDS analysis of 40 surnames (represented by abbreviations as shown in fig. 1) and controls (red star), based on pairwise RST calculated from Y-STR haplotype frequencies. White circle symbols indicate surnames not significantly different (P ≥ 0.05) from controls.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIG. 3.— Selected median-joining networks showing haplogroup and Y-STR haplotype diversity within controls and surname samples. Circles represent haplotypes, with areas proportional to frequency and colored according to haplogroup as shown in the key, top right. Lines between circles represent Y-STR or binary-marker mutational steps, with the shortest line in each network representing a single step. Boundaries of descent clusters are shown by the dotted ellipses.
FIG. 3.— Selected median-joining networks showing haplogroup and Y-STR haplotype diversity within controls and surname samples. Circles represent haplotypes, with areas proportional to frequency and colored according to haplogroup as shown in the key, top right. Lines between circles represent Y-STR or binary-marker mutational steps, with the shortest line in each network representing a single step. Boundaries of descent clusters are shown by the dotted ellipses.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIG. 4.— Proportions of haplotypes in largest descent cluster and match probabilities. (a) Percentage of haplotypes lying in the largest descent cluster, with surnames ordered by reverse frequency rank. (b) Match probabilities for perfectly matching haplotypes, and matches including single-step mutational neighbors, with surnames ordered by reverse frequency rank.
FIG. 4.— Proportions of haplotypes in largest descent cluster and match probabilities. (a) Percentage of haplotypes lying in the largest descent cluster, with surnames ordered by reverse frequency rank. (b) Match probabilities for perfectly matching haplotypes, and matches including single-step mutational neighbors, with surnames ordered by reverse frequency rank.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIG. 5.— Estimated ages of 74 descent clusters. Diamonds indicate estimates of TMRCA from the rho statistic within Network, and bars indicate standard deviations. The gray shaded area indicates the time since surname establishment (700 years). Surnames are ordered by frequency rank; note that some surnames contain more than one descent cluster that can be dated, whereas four (King, Bray, “Clemo,” and Beckham) contain none.
FIG. 5.— Estimated ages of 74 descent clusters. Diamonds indicate estimates of TMRCA from the rho statistic within Network, and bars indicate standard deviations. The gray shaded area indicates the time since surname establishment (700 years). Surnames are ordered by frequency rank; note that some surnames contain more than one descent cluster that can be dated, whereas four (King, Bray, “Clemo,” and Beckham) contain none.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central
FIG. 6.— Numbers of observed descent clusters given different founder numbers in simulated data. Ten thousand simulations were carried out for each founder number; most give no descendants. Percentages here are based on at least 100 simulations in each of which at least 100 descendants survive.
FIG. 6.— Numbers of observed descent clusters given different founder numbers in simulated data. Ten thousand simulations were carried out for each founder number; most give no descendants. Percentages here are based on at least 100 simulations in each of which at least 100 descendants survive.CC BY-NC · PubMed Central

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

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?

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 5 references

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. Adams, 2006, Forensic Science International, 159, 14, 10.1016/j.forsciint.2005.06.003 · DOI
  2. Bosch, 2006, Annals of human genetics, 70, 459, 10.1111/j.1469-1809.2005.00251.x · DOI
  3. Bosch, 2002, Forensic Science International, 125, 42, 10.1016/S0379-0738(01)00627-2 · DOI
  4. 2008, Molecular Biology and Evolution, 25, 301, 10.1093/molbev/msm255 · DOI
  5. Deutsch, 1991, Lancet, 338, 1151, 10.1016/0140-6736(91)92012-Q · DOI
  6. 2005, EVOL BIOINF ONLINE, 1, 47
  7. Forster, 1996, American journal of human genetics, 59, 935
  8. Garza-Chapa, 2000, American journal of human biology : the official journal of the Human Biology Council, 12, 721, 10.1002/1520-6300(200011/12)12:6<721::AID-AJHB1>3.0.CO;2-I · DOI
  9. Gusmao, 2005, Human mutation, 26, 520, 10.1002/humu.20254 · DOI
  10. Heyer, 1997, Human Molecular Genetics, 6, 799, 10.1093/hmg/6.5.799 · DOI
  11. Hurles, 2005, American journal of human genetics, 76, 894, 10.1086/430051 · DOI
  12. Jobling, 2001, Trends in genetics : TIG, 17, 353, 10.1016/S0168-9525(01)02284-3 · DOI
  13. Jobling, 2003, Nature reviews. Genetics, 4, 598, 10.1038/nrg1124 · DOI
  14. 2008, Genome Research, 18, 830, 10.1101/gr.7172008 · DOI · Paper page
  15. King, 2006, Current biology : CB, 16, 384, 10.1016/j.cub.2005.12.048 · DOI · Paper page
  16. King, 2007, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 132, 584, 10.1002/ajpa.20557 · DOI
  17. King, 2007, European journal of human genetics : EJHG, 15, 288, 10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201771 · DOI
  18. McEvoy, 2006, Human genetics, 119, 212, 10.1007/s00439-005-0131-8 · DOI · Paper page
  19. McEvoy, 2008, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 136, 415, 10.1002/ajpa.20823 · DOI
  20. McQuillan, 2008, American journal of human genetics, 83, 359, 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.08.007 · DOI
  21. Moore, 2006, American journal of human genetics, 78, 334, 10.1086/500055 · DOI · Paper page
  22. Sasse, 1994, Human heredity, 44, 337, 10.1159/000154241 · DOI
  23. Sykes, 2000, American journal of human genetics, 66, 1417, 10.1086/302850 · DOI
  24. Xue, 2005, American journal of human genetics, 77, 1112, 10.1086/498583 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Zhivotovsky, 2004, American journal of human genetics, 74, 50, 10.1086/380911 · DOI

Cited by

See all 117

Metadata

Authors
King, T. E., & Jobling, M. A.
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2009-02-09
Volume
26
Issue
5
Pages
1093-1102
ISSN
  • 0737-4038
  • 1537-1719
DOI
10.1093/molbev/msp022
PMC
PMC2668828
Cited by
117
References
5
Language
en

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: Founders, Drift, and Infidelity: The Relationship between Y Chromosome Diversity and Patrilineal Surnames. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/molbev/msp022
The paper
King, T. E., & Jobling, M. A. (2009). Founders, Drift, and Infidelity: The Relationship between Y Chromosome Diversity and Patrilineal Surnames. Molecular Biology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msp022