The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Revising how the computer program cervus accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment
Abstract
Genotypes are frequently used to identify parentage. Such analysis is notoriously vulnerable to genotyping error, and there is ongoing debate regarding how to solve this problem. Many scientists have used the computer program cervus to estimate parentage, and have taken advantage of its option to allow for genotyping error. In this study, we show that the likelihood equations used by versions 1.0 and 2.0 of cervus to accommodate genotyping error miscalculate the probability of observing an erroneous genotype. Computer simulation and reanalysis of paternity in Rum red deer show that correcting this error increases success in paternity assignment, and that there is a clear benefit to accommodating genotyping errors when errors are present. A new version of cervus (3.0) implementing the corrected likelihood equations is available at http://www.fieldgenetics.com .
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Parentage and Sibship Inference From Multilocus Genotype Data Under Polygamy
Wang, J., & Santure, A. W. (2009) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.108.100214 · Cited by 474
Why sampling scheme matters: the effect of sampling scheme on landscape genetic results
Schwartz, M. K., & McKelvey, K. S. (2009) · Conservation Genetics · doi:10.1007/s10592-008-9622-1 · Cited by 429
Determining the Polymorphism Information Content of a molecular marker
Serrote, C. M. L., Reiniger, L. R. S., Silva, K. B., Rabaiolli, S. M. D. S., & Stefanel, C. M. (2020) · Gene · doi:10.1016/j.gene.2019.144175 · Cited by 336
Fitness benefits of coalitionary aggression in male chimpanzees
Gilby, I. C., Brent, L. J. N., Wroblewski, E. E., Rudicell, R. S., Hahn, B. H., Goodall, J., & Pusey, A. E. (2013) · Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1007/s00265-012-1457-6 · Cited by 301
Mating advantage for rare males in wild guppy populations
Hughes, K. A., Houde, A. E., Price, A. C., & Rodd, F. H. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12717 · Cited by 169
Metadata
- Authors
- KALINOWSKI, S. T., TAPER, M. L., & MARSHALL, T. C.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-02-14
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1099-1106
- ISSN
- 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-294X
- OpenAlex
- W2107473082
- Cited by
- 5,232
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 87.75
- 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: Revising how the computer program cervus accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03089.x
- The paper
- KALINOWSKI, S. T., TAPER, M. L., & MARSHALL, T. C. (2007). Revising how the computer program cervus accommodates genotyping error increases success in paternity assignment. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03089.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.
