Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 722

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

SLiM 3: Forward Genetic Simulations Beyond the Wright–Fisher Model

Haller, Benjamin C, Messer, Philipp W·2019·Molecular Biology and Evolution
DOI 10.1093/molbev/msy228PMC PMC6389312

Published version of a preprint

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/msy228

Cites

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1. A comparison of the generation cycles in WF models (left) versus nonWF models (right). Note that nonWF models have a viability/survival selection phase, immediately after fitness value recalculation, whereas in WF models fitness influences mating success and there is no concept of mortality-based selection. Events and callbacks are shown in red; these are points in the generation cycle when SLiM will call out to the script to provide custom behavior. So-called early() and late() events provide commonly used points in the generation cycle when the model script can intervene in SLiM’s operation, toward the beginning and the end of each generation respectively, to do model-specific tasks—generate output, handle interactions between individuals, move individuals in space, and so forth. As this figure illustrates, in WF models early() events come before offspring generation and late() events come after; in nonWF models, early() events come after offspring generation, whereas late() events, by virtue of being at the end of the generation cycle, in effect come before offspring generation (when it occurs at the beginning of the next generation). Callbacks, on the other hand, allow the script to override specific aspects of SLiM’s behavior, such as choosing mates, customizing generated offspring, calculating fitness effects, or generating custom recombination breakpoints. Most of these callbacks exist in both WF and nonWF models, but mateChoice() callbacks exist only in WF models, whereas reproduction() callbacks are only in nonWF models and handle mate choice as well as other reproduction-related duties.
Fig. 1. A comparison of the generation cycles in WF models (left) versus nonWF models (right). Note that nonWF models have a viability/survival selection phase, immediately after fitness value recalculation, whereas in WF models fitness influences mating success and there is no concept of mortality-based selection. Events and callbacks are shown in red; these are points in the generation cycle when SLiM will call out to the script to provide custom behavior. So-called early() and late() events provide commonly used points in the generation cycle when the model script can intervene in SLiM’s operation, toward the beginning and the end of each generation respectively, to do model-specific tasks—generate output, handle interactions between individuals, move individuals in space, and so forth. As this figure illustrates, in WF models early() events come before offspring generation and late() events come after; in nonWF models, early() events come after offspring generation, whereas late() events, by virtue of being at the end of the generation cycle, in effect come before offspring generation (when it occurs at the beginning of the next generation). Callbacks, on the other hand, allow the script to override specific aspects of SLiM’s behavior, such as choosing mates, customizing generated offspring, calculating fitness effects, or generating custom recombination breakpoints. Most of these callbacks exist in both WF and nonWF models, but mateChoice() callbacks exist only in WF models, whereas reproduction() callbacks are only in nonWF models and handle mate choice as well as other reproduction-related duties.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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 18

  1. Bank, 2014, Thinking too positive? Revisiting current methods of population genetic selection inference, Trends Genet, 30, 540, 10.1016/j.tig.2014.09.010 · DOI
  2. Begon, 2006, Ecology: from individuals to ecosystems
  3. Bentley, 1975, Multidimensional binary search trees used for associative searching, Commun ACM, 18, 509, 10.1145/361002.361007 · DOI
  4. Carvajal-Rodriguez, 2010, Simulation of genes and genomes forward in time, Curr Genomics, 11, 58, 10.2174/138920210790218007 · DOI
  5. Fisher, 1922, On the dominance ratio, P Roy Soc Edinb, 42, 321, 10.1017/S0370164600023993 · DOI
  6. Grimm, 2002, Visual debugging: a way of analyzing, understanding and communicating bottom-up simulation models in ecology, Nat Resour Model, 15, 23, 10.1111/j.1939-7445.2002.tb00078.x · DOI
  7. Haller, 2016, SLiM: An Evolutionary Simulation Framework
  8. Haller, 2017, SLiM 2: flexible, interactive forward genetic simulations, Mol Biol Evol, 34, 230, 10.1093/molbev/msw211 · DOI
  9. Haller, 2018, Tree-sequence recording in SLiM opens new horizons for forward-time simulation of whole genomes, Mol Ecol Resour
  10. Hixon, 2002, Population regulation: historical context and contemporary challenges of open vs closed systems, Ecology, 83, 1490, 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[1490:PRHCAC]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  11. Hoban, 2014, An overview of the utility of population simulation software in molecular ecology, Mol Ecol, 23, 2383, 10.1111/mec.12741 · DOI
  12. Kelleher, 2016, Efficient coalescent simulation and genealogical analysis for large sample sizes, PLoS Comput Biol, 12, e1004842, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004842 · DOI
  13. Kelleher, 2018, Efficient pedigree recording for fast population genetics simulation, PLoS Comput Biol, 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006581 · DOI
  14. Messer, 2013, SLiM: simulating evolution with selection and linkage, Genetics, 194, 1037, 10.1534/genetics.113.152181 · DOI
  15. Tewarson, 1973, Sparse matrices
  16. Thornton, 2014, A C++ template library for efficient forward-time population genetic simulation of large populations, Genetics, 198, 157, 10.1534/genetics.114.165019 · DOI
  17. Wright, 1931, Evolution in Mendelian populations, Genetics, 16, 97, 10.1093/genetics/16.2.97 · DOI
  18. Yuan, 2012, An overview of population genetic data simulation, J Comput Biol, 19, 42, 10.1089/cmb.2010.0188 · DOI

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Haller, B. C., & Messer, P. W.
Venue
Molecular Biology and Evolution
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2019-01-18
Volume
36
Issue
3
Pages
632-637
ISSN
  • 0737-4038
  • 1537-1719
DOI
10.1093/molbev/msy228
PMC
PMC6389312
Cited by
722
References
0
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
  • College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (SS/05/01)
  • National Institutes of Health (R01GM127418)

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