Table 1 |
|||||||||
|
Allelic richness estimated by regression, coalescent and rarefaction |
|||||||||
|
Species |
ID |
Source data set |
Estimated allelic richness |
||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
No. of loci |
N |
A |
Subsampling (n = 120) |
ρ (n = 120) |
θEwens (n = 120) |
θcoalescent (n = 120) |
Rarefaction (n = 120) |
||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Microsatellites |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Picea rubens |
PR1 |
6 |
180 |
13.00 |
11.06 |
11.04 |
11.98 |
9.23 |
10.68 |
|
PR2 |
6 |
180 |
13.33 |
11.18 |
11.17 |
12.29 |
8.94 |
10.71 |
|
|
PR3 |
6 |
180 |
15.33 |
12.48 |
12.44 |
14.13 |
11.92 |
12.19 |
|
|
PR4 |
6 |
180 |
14.83 |
12.48 |
12.44 |
13.67 |
12.13 |
11.92 |
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Picea glauca |
PG1 |
6 |
105 |
22.83 |
21.13 |
21.30 |
23.49 |
35.74 |
20.96 |
|
PG2 |
6 |
105 |
22.83 |
20.55 |
20.62 |
23.49 |
51.84 |
20.44 |
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Pinus strobus |
PS1 |
13 |
102 |
9.77 |
9.03 |
9.13 |
10.11 |
17.57 |
9.03 |
|
PS2 |
13 |
102 |
9.23 |
8.67 |
8.73 |
9.55 |
15.91 |
8.68 |
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Thuja occidentalis |
TO1 |
6 |
100 |
7.83 |
7.18 |
7.17 |
8.14 |
12.26 |
7.17 |
|
TO2 |
6 |
100 |
9.67 |
8.95 |
9.00 |
10.05 |
16.28 |
9.09 |
|
|
TO3 |
6 |
100 |
8.83 |
7.86 |
7.95 |
9.18 |
14.06 |
7.95 |
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Allozymes |
|||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Pinus strobus |
PS1 |
15 |
95 |
3.20 |
2.97 |
2.98 |
3.38 |
3.34 |
2.93 |
|
PS2 |
15 |
95 |
3.27 |
3.09 |
3.10 |
3.59 |
4.15 |
3.04 |
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
Subsampling - allelic richness estimated by repeated random subsampling in pseudosimulated population data sets based on the empirical data. ρ - allelic richness predicted by the regression model (5). θEwens - Allelic richness predicted by the Ewens sampling formula (3), where θ was directly calculated from the empirical data set. θcoalescent - Allelic richness predicted by the Ewens sampling formula (3), where θ was estimated by coalescent approach from the empirical data set. Rarefaction - Allelic richness predicted by rarefaction of the source empirical data set to the sample size of n = 120. |
|||||||||
|
Bashalkhanov et al. BMC Genetics 2009 10:84 doi:10.1186/1471-2156-10-84 |
|||||||||
