Confidently identifying the correct K value using the ΔK method: when does K = 2?

Clicks: 441
ID: 93058
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #9 of 49 articles by views in molecular ecology

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Populations delineated based on genetic data are commonly used for wildlife conservation and management. Many studies use the program structure, combined with the ΔK method to identify the most probable number of populations (K). We recently found K = 2 was identified more often when studies used ΔK compared to studies that did not. We suggested two reasons for this: hierarchical population structure leads to underestimation, or the ΔK method does not evaluate K = 1 causing an overestimation. Our current work aims to develop a better understanding of the limits of the method using one, two, and three population simulations across migration scenarios. From these simulations we identified the "best K" using model likelihood and ΔK. Our findings show that mean probability plots and ΔK are unable to resolve the correct number of populations once migration rate exceeds 0.005. We also found a strong bias towards selecting K = 2 using the ΔK method. We used these data to identify the range of values where the ΔK statistic identifies a value of K that is not well supported. Finally, using the simulations and a review of empirical data, we found that the magnitude of ΔK corresponds to the level of divergence between populations. Based on our findings, we suggest researchers should use the ΔK method cautiously; they need to report all relevant data, including the magnitude of ΔK, and an estimate of connectivity for the research community to assess whether meaningful genetic structure exists within the context of management and conservation.
Reference Key
cullingham2020confidentlymolecular Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Cullingham, C I;Miller, J M;Peery, R M;Dupuis, J R;Malenfant, R M;Gorrell, J C;Janes, J K;
Journal molecular ecology
Year 2020
DOI
10.1111/mec.15374
URL
Keywords
population structure genetic structure f st migration rate Δk

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.