Table 3

Matrix of macro-geographic population differentiation based on RST and FST estimators

Hr

Kk

Me

Mz

Tu

Se

Nb

Ko

Kp

Ny


Hr

0.427***

0.072**

0.601***

0.472***

0.713***

0.636***

0.693***

0.587**

0.660***

Kk

0.296***

0.473***

0.696***

0.582***

0.833***

0.787***

0.816***

0.709***

0.770***

Me

0.059**

0.287***

0.553***

0.377***

0.692***

0.599***

0.671***

0.573***

0.632***

Mz

0.451***

0.553***

0.425***

0.259***

0.384***

0.247***

0.397***

0.425***

0.424***

Tu

0.442***

0.549***

0.416***

0.115***

0.431***

0.209***

0.469***

0.520***

0.517***

Se

0.489***

0.596***

0.467***

0.225***

0.229***

0.217***

0.152***

0.133**

0.101**

Nb

0.603***

0.723***

0.585***

0.326***

0.331***

0.243***

0.377***

0.374***

0.349***

Ko

0.507***

0.607***

0.481***

0.222***

0.214***

0.097***

0.306***

0.0249ns

0.0073ns

Kp

0.404***

0.456***

0.392***

0.216***

0.221***

0.054**

0.246***

0.054**

0.0142ns

Ny

0.455***

0.524***

0.440***

0.243***

0.224***

0.101***

0.261***

0.095**

0.078**


Pairwise RST (above diagonal) and FST (below diagonal) for the ten spatial populations studied, with corresponding level of significance (based on 10,000 replicates). The significance of the test of Hardy [35] (P < 0.001) suggests that RST is more appropriate to describe genetic differentiation among these populations than FST.

Bezault et al. BMC Genetics 2011 12:102   doi:10.1186/1471-2156-12-102

Open Data