Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 487

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Species Delimitation using Genome-Wide SNP Data

Open access
Leaché, Adam D., Fujita, Matthew K., Minin, Vladimir N., Bouckaert, Remco R.·2014·Systematic Biology

Abstract

The multispecies coalescent has provided important progress for evolutionary inferences, including increasing the statistical rigor and objectivity of comparisons among competing species delimitation models. However, Bayesian species delimitation methods typically require brute force integration over gene trees via Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC), which introduces a large computation burden and precludes their application to genomic-scale data. Here we combine a recently introduced dynamic programming algorithm for estimating species trees that bypasses MCMC integration over gene trees with sophisticated methods for estimating marginal likelihoods, needed for Bayesian model selection, to provide a rigorous and computationally tractable technique for genome-wide species delimitation. We provide a critical yet simple correction that brings the likelihoods of different species trees, and more importantly their corresponding marginal likelihoods, to the same common denominator, which enables direct and accurate comparisons of competing species delimitation models using Bayes factors. We test this approach, which we call Bayes factor delimitation (*with genomic data; BFD*), using common species delimitation scenarios with computer simulations. Varying the numbers of loci and the number of samples suggest that the approach can distinguish the true model even with few loci and limited samples per species. Misspecification of the prior for population size θ has little impact on support for the true model. We apply the approach to West African forest geckos (Hemidactylus fasciatus complex) using genome-wide SNP data. This new Bayesian method for species delimitation builds on a growing trend for objective species delimitation methods with explicit model assumptions that are easily tested. [Bayes factor; model testing; phylogeography; RADseq; simulation; speciation.].

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/sysbio/syu018

Cites

7 of 7 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 7 references

Cited by

See all 487

Metadata

Authors
Leaché, A. D., Fujita, M. K., Minin, V. N., & Bouckaert, R. R.
Venue
Systematic Biology
Published
2014-03-12
Volume
63
Issue
4
Pages
534-542
ISSN
  • 1063-5157 (ISSN-L)
  • 1076-836X
OpenAlex
W2161759962
Cited by
487
References
7
FWCI
20.61
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Species Delimitation using Genome-Wide SNP Data. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/sysbio/syu018
The paper
Leaché, A. D., Fujita, M. K., Minin, V. N., & Bouckaert, R. R. (2014). Species Delimitation using Genome-Wide SNP Data. Systematic Biology. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/syu018

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.