Cited by 34Forensic and Genetic ResearchGenetic diversity and population structureGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

Comparison of Genetic Distance Measures Using Human SNP Genotype Data

Libiger, Ondrej, Nievergelt, Caroline M., Schork, Nicholas J.·2009·Human Biology

Abstract

Quantification of the genetic distance between populations is instrumental in many genetic research initiatives, and a large number of formulas for this purpose have been proposed. However, selection of an appropriate measure for assessing genetic distance between real-world human populations that diverged as a result of mechanisms that are not fully known can be a challenging task. We compared results from nine widely used genetic distance measures to high-density whole-genome SNP genotype data obtained on individuals from 51 world populations. Using population trees and generalized analysis of molecular variance, we found that contradictory inferences could be drawn from analyses that used different distance measures. We determined the grouping of the distance measures in terms of similarity and consistency of their values using concordance, consistency, and Procrustes analyses. Overall, the Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards distance measure differed the most from the other measures. Wright's F(ST) for diploid data, the Latter and Reynolds distances, and Nei's minimum distance measures each yielded values that were most consistent with the other eight distance measures in terms of ordering populations based on genetic distance. The Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards distance and Nei's geometric distance were least consistent. Simulation studies showed that the Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards distance is relatively more sensitive in distinguishing genetically similar populations and that the Reynolds genetic distance provides the highest sensitivity for highly divergent populations. Finally, our study suggests that using the Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards distance may provide less power for studies concerning human migration history.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3378/027.081.0401

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • The choice of a distance measure can impact the interpretation of within-species ancestral relationships based on DNA sequence.

    “For within-species studies assessing the ancestral relationships between populations based on DNA sequence, it has been shown that the choice of a distance measure can impact the interpretation of the results50, 128.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Libiger, O., Nievergelt, C. M., & Schork, N. J.
Affiliations
  • Scripps Research Institute (US)
  • University of California San Diego (US)
Venue
Human Biology
Published
2009-08
Volume
81
Issue
4
Pages
389-406
ISSN
  • 0018-7143 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-6617
OpenAlex
W2081773979
Cited by
34
References
39
Citations by year
2023: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
FWCI
1.75
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Human Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Human Biology (submittedVersion)
  • Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) (submittedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Univerzita Karlova v Praze
  • Instituto Nacional de Medicina Genómica
  • National Institutes of Health (5u01da024417-02, n01mh22005-16-0-1)
  • National Institute on Aging (U19AG023122)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (U01HL064777)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (N01 MH-22005, R01MH078151, P50MH081755)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (U01 DA024417-01)
  • National Center for Research Resources (1U54RR025204-01)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
human populations, F(ST), population divergence, human migration history
MeSH terms
Alleles, Emigration and Immigration, Gene Frequency, Genetics, Population, Genotype, Humans, Models, Genetic, Molecular Biology, Phylogeny, Genome, Human, Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide, Population Groups

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