Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 887

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficiency of model‐based Bayesian methods for detecting hybrid individuals under different hybridization scenarios and with different numbers of loci

VÄHÄ, JUHA‐PEKKA, PRIMMER, CRAIG R.·2006·Molecular Ecology

Abstract

Accurate detection of offspring resulting from hybridization between individuals of distinct populations has a range of applications in conservation and population genetics. We assessed the hybrid identification efficiency of two methods (implemented in the structure and newhybrids programs) which are tailored to identifying hybrid individuals but use different approaches. Simulated first‐ and second‐generation hybrids were used to assess the performance of these two methods in detecting recent hybridization under scenarios with different levels of genetic divergence and varying numbers of loci. Despite the different approaches of the methods, the hybrid detection efficiency was generally similar and neither of the two methods outperformed the other in all scenarios assessed. Interestingly, hybrid detection efficiency was only minimally affected by whether reference population allele frequency information was included or not. In terms of genotyping effort, efficient detection of F 1 hybrid individuals requires the use of 12 or 24 loci with pairwise FST between hybridizing parental populations of 0.21 or 0.12, respectively. While achievable, these locus numbers are nevertheless higher than the number of loci currently commonly applied in population genetic studies. The method of structure seemed to be less sensitive to the proportion of hybrids included in the sample, while newhybrids seemed to perform slightly better when individuals from both backcross and F 1 hybrid classes were present in the sample. However, separating backcrosses from purebred parental individuals requires a considerable genotyping effort (at least 48 loci), even when divergence between parental populations is high.

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 · 10.1111/j.1365-294x.2005.02773.x

Cites

35 of 35 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 35 references

Cited by

See all 887

Metadata

Authors
VÄHÄ, J., & PRIMMER, C. R.
Venue
Molecular Ecology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-11-22
Volume
15
Issue
1
Pages
63-72
ISSN
  • 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-294X
OpenAlex
W2159400585
Cited by
887
References
35
FWCI
12.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Efficiency of model‐based Bayesian methods for detecting hybrid individuals under different hybridization scenarios and with different numbers of loci. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2005.02773.x
The paper
VÄHÄ, J., & PRIMMER, C. R. (2006). Efficiency of model‐based Bayesian methods for detecting hybrid individuals under different hybridization scenarios and with different numbers of loci. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2005.02773.x

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.