Table 3

Slopes of regression lines for plots of corrected versus uncorrected pairwise distances
All accessions No non-Pinusoutgroups SubgenusPinus SubgenusStrobus section Quinquefoliae+P. monophylla sectionPinus +P. ponderosa sectionTrifoliae+P. thunbergii
Full alignment 0.9574 0.9682 0.9898 0.9893 0.9905 0.9925 0.9928
(0.9571-0.9577) (0.9681-0.9683) (0.9895-0.9898) (0.9888-0.9898) (0.9893-0.9918) (0.9911-0.9939) (0.9921-0.9935)
A136665 0.9604 0.9851 0.9935 0.9903 0.9916 0.9941 0.9948
(0.9601-0.9607) (0.9850-0.9853) (0.9929-0.9941) (0.9897-0.9908) (0.9903-0.9928) (0.9923-0.9958) (0.9939-0.9958)
A133065 0.9655 0.9954 0.9959 0.9950 0.9952 0.9955 0.9961
(0.9653-0.9656) (0.9950-0.9958) (0.9953-0.9964) (0.9938-0.9962) (0.9932-0.9972) (0.9935-0.9976) (0.9953-0.9969)

95% confidence intervals for slopes are shown in parentheses. Slopes with values below 1.0 represent increased levels of saturation in the alignment tested. Intercepts of all lines were significantly different than zero at p < ≤0, with the exception of section Pinus + P. ponderosa for treatment A133065, which was not significantly different than zero. 95% confidence intervals for intercepts significantly different than zero were all 1.8 × 10-6 ≤ y ≤ 0.00040.

Parks et al.

Parks et al. BMC Evolutionary Biology 2012 12:100   doi:10.1186/1471-2148-12-100

Open Data