4.8 Article

Inferring Species Trees Directly from Biallelic Genetic Markers: Bypassing Gene Trees in a Full Coalescent Analysis

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY AND EVOLUTION
卷 29, 期 8, 页码 1917-1932

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/mss086

关键词

multispecies coalescent; species trees; SNP; AFLP; effective population size; SNAPP

资金

  1. Alexander von Humboldt foundation
  2. NZ Marsden fund
  3. Allan Wilson Centre for Molecular Ecology and Evolution
  4. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [GM-45344, R01 GM071639-01A1, R01 GM071639, R01 HG004839, R01 GM 081441]
  5. Department of Genome Sciences, University of Washington
  6. National Science Foundation [DBI-1146722]
  7. Burroughs Wellcome Fund
  8. Direct For Biological Sciences
  9. Division Of Environmental Biology [1019583] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  10. Div Of Biological Infrastructure
  11. Direct For Biological Sciences [1146722] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The multispecies coalescent provides an elegant theoretical framework for estimating species trees and species demographics from genetic markers. However, practical applications of the multispecies coalescent model are limited by the need to integrate or sample over all gene trees possible for each genetic marker. Here we describe a polynomial-time algorithm that computes the likelihood of a species tree directly from the markers under a finite-sites model of mutation effectively integrating over all possible gene trees. The method applies to independent (unlinked) biallelic markers such as well-spaced single nucleotide polymorphisms, and we have implemented it in SNAPP, a Markov chain Monte Carlo sampler for inferring species trees, divergence dates, and population sizes. We report results from simulation experiments and from an analysis of 1997 amplified fragment length polymorphism loci in 69 individuals sampled from six species of Ourisia (New Zealand native foxglove).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据