Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,437

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A COMPARISON OF THREE INDIRECT METHODS FOR ESTIMATING AVERAGE LEVELS OF GENE FLOW

Slatkin, Montgomery, Barton, Nicholas H.·1989·Evolution

Abstract

Three methods for estimating the average level of gene flow in natural population are discussed and compared. The three methods are FST, rare alleles, and maximum likelihood. All three methods yield estimates of the combination of parameters (the number of migrants [Nm] in a demic model or the neighborhood size [4πDσ2] in a continuum model) that determines the relative importance of gene flow and genetic drift. We review the theory underlying these methods and derive new analytic results for the expectation of FST in stepping‐stone and continuum models when small sets of samples are taken. We also compare the effectiveness of the different methods using a variety of simulated data. We found that the FST and rare‐alleles methods yield comparable estimates under a wide variety of conditions when the population being sampled is demographically stable. They are roughly equally sensitive to selection and to variation in population structure, and they approach their equilibrium values at approximately the same rate. We found that two different maximum‐likelihood methods tend to yield biased estimates when relatively small numbers of locations are sampled but more accurate estimates when larger numbers are sampled. Our conclusion is that, although FST and rare‐alleles methods are expected to be equally effective in analyzing ideal data, practical problems in estimating the frequencies of rare alleles in electrophoretic studies suggest that FST is likely to be more useful under realistic conditions.

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.1558-5646.1989.tb02587.x

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 1,437

Metadata

Authors
Slatkin, M., & Barton, N. H.
Venue
Evolution
Published
1989-11
Volume
43
Issue
7
Pages
1349-1368
ISSN
  • 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-5646
OpenAlex
W1964510979
Cited by
1,437
References
1
FWCI
12.78
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: A COMPARISON OF THREE INDIRECT METHODS FOR ESTIMATING AVERAGE LEVELS OF GENE FLOW. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1989.tb02587.x
The paper
Slatkin, M., & Barton, N. H. (1989). A COMPARISON OF THREE INDIRECT METHODS FOR ESTIMATING AVERAGE LEVELS OF GENE FLOW. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1989.tb02587.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.