Paper detail

Minimal-assumption inference from population-genomic data

Samples of multiple complete genome sequences contain vast amounts of information about the evolutionary history of populations, much of it in the associations among polymorphisms at different loci. Current methods that take advantage of this linkage information rely on models of recombination and coalescence, limiting the sample sizes and populations that they can analyze. We introduce a method, Minimal-Assumption Genomic Inference of Coalescence (MAGIC), that reconstructs key features of the evolutionary history, including the distribution of coalescence times, by integrating information across genomic length scales without using an explicit model of recombination, demography or selection. Using simulated data, we show that MAGIC's performance is comparable to PSMC' on single diploid samples generated with standard coalescent and recombination models. More importantly, MAGIC can also analyze arbitrarily large samples and is robust to changes in the coalescent and recombination processes. Using MAGIC, we show that the inferred coalescence time histories of samples of multiple human genomes exhibit inconsistencies with a description in terms of an effective population size based on single-genome data.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.