Journal
MOLECULAR ECOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 22, Pages 4782-4785Publisher
WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-294X.2008.03958.x
Keywords
F(ST); local adaptation; population differentiation; P(ST); Q(ST); wild populations
Funding
- Natural Environment Research Council [NE/D008883/1, NE/C511313/1] Funding Source: researchfish
- NERC [NE/D008883/1] Funding Source: UKRI
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Comparisons between putatively neutral genetic differentiation amongst populations, F(ST), and quantitative genetic variation, Q(ST), are increasingly being used to test for natural selection. However, we find that approximately half of the comparisons that use only data from wild populations confound phenotypic and genetic variation. We urge the use of a clear distinction between narrow-sense Q(ST), which can be meaningfully compared with F(ST), and phenotypic divergence measured between populations, P(ST), which is inadequate for comparisons in the wild. We also point out that an unbiased estimate of Q(ST) can be found using the so-called 'animal model' of quantitative genetics.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available