Table 4

Likelihood ratio test results of group 3 AtWRKY and CsWRKY.

Group 3 AtWRKY


Nodea

dN/dS M0b

2ΔlnL M3 vs. M0

2ΔlnL M8 vs. M7

M8 estimatesc

No. of positive selection sitesd

1

0.5712

170.69**

17.76**

ω = 2.78

β(p = 0.76 q = 1.17)

7

2

0.5689

36.21**

6.92*

ω = 4.68

β(p = 0.39 q = 0.34)

10

3

0.3248

141.78**

8.37*

ω = 32.95

β(p = 0.37 q = 0.26)

5

4

0.6485

54.62**

9.97**

ω = 77.65

β(p = 0.66 q = 1.05)

11

5

0.2682

169.06**

10.66**

ω = 3.32

β(p = 0.72 q = 0.78)

9


Group 3 CsWRKY


Node

dN/dS M0

2ΔlnL M3 vs. M0

2ΔlnL M8 vs. M7

M8 estimates

No. of positive selection sites

1

0.3331

37.31**

1.40e-05

ω = 4.28

β(p = 0.85 q = 1.39)

0

2

0.3623

83.01**

8.80e-05

ω = 1.00

β(p = 0.72 q = 1.143)

0

3

0.3081

186.07**

2.99e-05

ω = 24.88

β(p = 0.60 q = 0.55)

0


Note: * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01 (χ2 test)

a Node number from the phylogenetic tree

b dN/dS is the average ratio over sites under a codon model with one ratio

c ω was estimated under model M8; p and q are the parameters of the beta distribution

d The number of amino acid sites estimated to have undergone positive selection under M8

Ling et al. BMC Genomics 2011 12:471   doi:10.1186/1471-2164-12-471

Open Data