Loading…

Comparison of Bayesian and maximum-likelihood inference of population genetic parameters

Comparison of the performance and accuracy of different inference methods, such as maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference, is difficult because the inference methods are implemented in different programs, often written by different authors. Both methods were implemented in the program MIGRAT...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Bioinformatics 2006-02, Vol.22 (3), p.341-345
Main Author: BEERLI, Peter
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-20e960c45bc73a0ce5f30cdadb218f166a331f3e6895fcb43a940a59201567963
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-20e960c45bc73a0ce5f30cdadb218f166a331f3e6895fcb43a940a59201567963
container_end_page 345
container_issue 3
container_start_page 341
container_title Bioinformatics
container_volume 22
creator BEERLI, Peter
description Comparison of the performance and accuracy of different inference methods, such as maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference, is difficult because the inference methods are implemented in different programs, often written by different authors. Both methods were implemented in the program MIGRATE, that estimates population genetic parameters, such as population sizes and migration rates, using coalescence theory. Both inference methods use the same Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm and differ from each other in only two aspects: parameter proposal distribution and maximization of the likelihood function. Using simulated datasets, the Bayesian method generally fares better than the ML approach in accuracy and coverage, although for some values the two approaches are equal in performance. Motivation: The Markov chain Monte Carlo-based ML framework can fail on sparse data and can deliver non-conservative support intervals. A Bayesian framework with appropriate prior distribution is able to remedy some of these problems. Results: The program MIGRATE was extended to allow not only for ML(-) maximum likelihood estimation of population genetics parameters but also for using a Bayesian framework. Comparisons between the Bayesian approach and the ML approach are facilitated because both modes estimate the same parameters under the same population model and assumptions. Availability: The program is available from Contact:beerli@csit.fsu.edu
doi_str_mv 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti803
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70758026</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1006452601</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-20e960c45bc73a0ce5f30cdadb218f166a331f3e6895fcb43a940a59201567963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU9v1DAQxSNERUvhI4AiJLilteN_yRFWwCJW4gBIFRdr4ozBbWyndiK1376udkUFl5488vzemxm9qnpFyRklPTsfXHTBxuRhcSafD4vrCHtSnVAuSdMS0T8tNZOq4eX_uHqe8yUhgnLOn1XHVDKqiGpPqotN9DMkl2Ooo60_wC1mB6GGMNYebpxffTO5K5zcnxjHuozEhMHgPTzHeZ3K-CL9jQHLHnWxAo8LpvyiOrIwZXx5eE-rn58-_thsm923z18273eNEVwuZVPsJTFcDEYxIAaFZcSMMA4t7SyVEhijlqHsemHNwBn0nIDoW0KFVL1kp9W7ve-c4vWKedHeZYPTBAHjmnU5U3SkfRykPWddx2kB3_wHXsY1hXJEYTopiWCkQGIPmRRzTmj1nJyHdKsp0fcB6X8D0vuAiu71wXwdPI4PqkMiBXh7ACAbmGyCYFx-4BSXvJO8cM2ec3nBm799SFdaKqaE3l780mrXCr79vtVf2R178K3M</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>198660530</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of Bayesian and maximum-likelihood inference of population genetic parameters</title><source>Oxford Open</source><creator>BEERLI, Peter</creator><creatorcontrib>BEERLI, Peter</creatorcontrib><description>Comparison of the performance and accuracy of different inference methods, such as maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference, is difficult because the inference methods are implemented in different programs, often written by different authors. Both methods were implemented in the program MIGRATE, that estimates population genetic parameters, such as population sizes and migration rates, using coalescence theory. Both inference methods use the same Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm and differ from each other in only two aspects: parameter proposal distribution and maximization of the likelihood function. Using simulated datasets, the Bayesian method generally fares better than the ML approach in accuracy and coverage, although for some values the two approaches are equal in performance. Motivation: The Markov chain Monte Carlo-based ML framework can fail on sparse data and can deliver non-conservative support intervals. A Bayesian framework with appropriate prior distribution is able to remedy some of these problems. Results: The program MIGRATE was extended to allow not only for ML(-) maximum likelihood estimation of population genetics parameters but also for using a Bayesian framework. Comparisons between the Bayesian approach and the ML approach are facilitated because both modes estimate the same parameters under the same population model and assumptions. Availability: The program is available from Contact:beerli@csit.fsu.edu</description><identifier>ISSN: 1367-4803</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2059</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1367-4811</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/bti803</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16317072</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BOINFP</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Bayes Theorem ; Biological and medical sciences ; Biological Evolution ; Chromosome Mapping - methods ; Computer Simulation ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; General aspects ; Genetics, Population - methods ; Likelihood Functions ; Mathematics in biology. Statistical analysis. Models. Metrology. Data processing in biology (general aspects) ; Models, Genetic ; Models, Statistical ; Phylogeny ; Software</subject><ispartof>Bioinformatics, 2006-02, Vol.22 (3), p.341-345</ispartof><rights>Copyright Oxford University Press(England) Feb 1, 2006</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-20e960c45bc73a0ce5f30cdadb218f166a331f3e6895fcb43a940a59201567963</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-20e960c45bc73a0ce5f30cdadb218f166a331f3e6895fcb43a940a59201567963</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=17464864$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16317072$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>BEERLI, Peter</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of Bayesian and maximum-likelihood inference of population genetic parameters</title><title>Bioinformatics</title><addtitle>Bioinformatics</addtitle><description>Comparison of the performance and accuracy of different inference methods, such as maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference, is difficult because the inference methods are implemented in different programs, often written by different authors. Both methods were implemented in the program MIGRATE, that estimates population genetic parameters, such as population sizes and migration rates, using coalescence theory. Both inference methods use the same Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm and differ from each other in only two aspects: parameter proposal distribution and maximization of the likelihood function. Using simulated datasets, the Bayesian method generally fares better than the ML approach in accuracy and coverage, although for some values the two approaches are equal in performance. Motivation: The Markov chain Monte Carlo-based ML framework can fail on sparse data and can deliver non-conservative support intervals. A Bayesian framework with appropriate prior distribution is able to remedy some of these problems. Results: The program MIGRATE was extended to allow not only for ML(-) maximum likelihood estimation of population genetics parameters but also for using a Bayesian framework. Comparisons between the Bayesian approach and the ML approach are facilitated because both modes estimate the same parameters under the same population model and assumptions. Availability: The program is available from Contact:beerli@csit.fsu.edu</description><subject>Bayes Theorem</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Biological Evolution</subject><subject>Chromosome Mapping - methods</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>General aspects</subject><subject>Genetics, Population - methods</subject><subject>Likelihood Functions</subject><subject>Mathematics in biology. Statistical analysis. Models. Metrology. Data processing in biology (general aspects)</subject><subject>Models, Genetic</subject><subject>Models, Statistical</subject><subject>Phylogeny</subject><subject>Software</subject><issn>1367-4803</issn><issn>1460-2059</issn><issn>1367-4811</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkU9v1DAQxSNERUvhI4AiJLilteN_yRFWwCJW4gBIFRdr4ozBbWyndiK1376udkUFl5488vzemxm9qnpFyRklPTsfXHTBxuRhcSafD4vrCHtSnVAuSdMS0T8tNZOq4eX_uHqe8yUhgnLOn1XHVDKqiGpPqotN9DMkl2Ooo60_wC1mB6GGMNYebpxffTO5K5zcnxjHuozEhMHgPTzHeZ3K-CL9jQHLHnWxAo8LpvyiOrIwZXx5eE-rn58-_thsm923z18273eNEVwuZVPsJTFcDEYxIAaFZcSMMA4t7SyVEhijlqHsemHNwBn0nIDoW0KFVL1kp9W7ve-c4vWKedHeZYPTBAHjmnU5U3SkfRykPWddx2kB3_wHXsY1hXJEYTopiWCkQGIPmRRzTmj1nJyHdKsp0fcB6X8D0vuAiu71wXwdPI4PqkMiBXh7ACAbmGyCYFx-4BSXvJO8cM2ec3nBm799SFdaKqaE3l780mrXCr79vtVf2R178K3M</recordid><startdate>20060201</startdate><enddate>20060201</enddate><creator>BEERLI, Peter</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><general>Oxford Publishing Limited (England)</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7TO</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060201</creationdate><title>Comparison of Bayesian and maximum-likelihood inference of population genetic parameters</title><author>BEERLI, Peter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-20e960c45bc73a0ce5f30cdadb218f166a331f3e6895fcb43a940a59201567963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Bayes Theorem</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Biological Evolution</topic><topic>Chromosome Mapping - methods</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>General aspects</topic><topic>Genetics, Population - methods</topic><topic>Likelihood Functions</topic><topic>Mathematics in biology. Statistical analysis. Models. Metrology. Data processing in biology (general aspects)</topic><topic>Models, Genetic</topic><topic>Models, Statistical</topic><topic>Phylogeny</topic><topic>Software</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>BEERLI, Peter</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics &amp; Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Oncogenes and Growth Factors Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology &amp; Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Bioinformatics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>BEERLI, Peter</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of Bayesian and maximum-likelihood inference of population genetic parameters</atitle><jtitle>Bioinformatics</jtitle><addtitle>Bioinformatics</addtitle><date>2006-02-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>341</spage><epage>345</epage><pages>341-345</pages><issn>1367-4803</issn><eissn>1460-2059</eissn><eissn>1367-4811</eissn><coden>BOINFP</coden><abstract>Comparison of the performance and accuracy of different inference methods, such as maximum likelihood (ML) and Bayesian inference, is difficult because the inference methods are implemented in different programs, often written by different authors. Both methods were implemented in the program MIGRATE, that estimates population genetic parameters, such as population sizes and migration rates, using coalescence theory. Both inference methods use the same Markov chain Monte Carlo algorithm and differ from each other in only two aspects: parameter proposal distribution and maximization of the likelihood function. Using simulated datasets, the Bayesian method generally fares better than the ML approach in accuracy and coverage, although for some values the two approaches are equal in performance. Motivation: The Markov chain Monte Carlo-based ML framework can fail on sparse data and can deliver non-conservative support intervals. A Bayesian framework with appropriate prior distribution is able to remedy some of these problems. Results: The program MIGRATE was extended to allow not only for ML(-) maximum likelihood estimation of population genetics parameters but also for using a Bayesian framework. Comparisons between the Bayesian approach and the ML approach are facilitated because both modes estimate the same parameters under the same population model and assumptions. Availability: The program is available from Contact:beerli@csit.fsu.edu</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>16317072</pmid><doi>10.1093/bioinformatics/bti803</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1367-4803
ispartof Bioinformatics, 2006-02, Vol.22 (3), p.341-345
issn 1367-4803
1460-2059
1367-4811
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70758026
source Oxford Open
subjects Bayes Theorem
Biological and medical sciences
Biological Evolution
Chromosome Mapping - methods
Computer Simulation
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
General aspects
Genetics, Population - methods
Likelihood Functions
Mathematics in biology. Statistical analysis. Models. Metrology. Data processing in biology (general aspects)
Models, Genetic
Models, Statistical
Phylogeny
Software
title Comparison of Bayesian and maximum-likelihood inference of population genetic parameters
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-03T09%3A10%3A46IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20Bayesian%20and%20maximum-likelihood%20inference%20of%20population%20genetic%20parameters&rft.jtitle=Bioinformatics&rft.au=BEERLI,%20Peter&rft.date=2006-02-01&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=341&rft.epage=345&rft.pages=341-345&rft.issn=1367-4803&rft.eissn=1460-2059&rft.coden=BOINFP&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti803&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1006452601%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c546t-20e960c45bc73a0ce5f30cdadb218f166a331f3e6895fcb43a940a59201567963%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=198660530&rft_id=info:pmid/16317072&rfr_iscdi=true