Back

Leveraging shared ancestral variation to detect local introgression

Lopez Fang, L.; Ortega-Del Vecchyo, D.; McTavish, E. J.; Huerta-Sanchez, E.

2022-03-21 evolutionary biology
10.1101/2022.03.21.485082 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Introgression is a common evolutionary phenomenon that results in shared genetic material across non-sister taxa. Existing statistical methods such as Pattersons D statistic can detect introgression by measuring an excess of shared derived alleles between populations. The D statistic is effective to detect genome-wide patterns of introgression but can give spurious inferences of introgression when applied to local regions. We propose a new statistic, D+, that leverages both shared ancestral and derived alleles to infer local introgressed regions. Incorporating both shared derived and ancestral alleles increases the number of informative sites per region, improving our ability to identify local introgression. We use a coalescent framework to derive the expected value of this statistic as a function of different demographic parameters under an instantaneous admixture model and use coalescent simulations to compute the power and precision of D+. While the power of D and D+ is comparable, D+ has better precision than D. We apply D+ to empirical data from the 1000 Genome Project and Heliconius butterflies to infer local targets of introgression in humans and in butterflies.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS Genetics
● 862 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
22.1%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Molecular Biology and Evolution
◐ 542 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
9.6%
Similar papers in this journal
3
GENETICS
◐ 483 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
9.6%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Genome Biology and Evolution
◐ 338 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
7.8%
Similar papers in this journal
5
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
◐ 351 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
7.2%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
6
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 8%
4.3%
7
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.4%
8
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.4%
9
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.2%
10
BMC Ecology and Evolution
○ 51 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.1%
11
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.5%
12
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B
● 51 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
13
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
◐ 252 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
14
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 60%
1.3%
15
Molecular Ecology Resources
○ 171 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
16
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.1%
17
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
● 393 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
18
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 38%
1.0%
19
BMC Evolutionary Biology
○ 18 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.0%
20
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 62%
1.0%
21
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
● 72 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
22
Heredity
○ 64 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
23
Journal of Molecular Evolution
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.8%
24
Genome Research
● 468 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
25
Virus Evolution
◐ 155 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
26
Royal Society Open Science
● 214 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.6%
27
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.