Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

A Bayesian framework for comparative quantitative genetics.

Otso Ovaskainen1, José Manuel Cano, Juha Merilä

  • 1Department of Biological and Environmental Sciences, PO Box 65, F1-00014, University of Helsinki, Finland. otso.ovaskainen@helsinki.fi

Proceedings. Biological Sciences
|January 24, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

How precise are mutation rate estimates? Comparison of different approaches to estimate de novo mutation rates.

Heredity·2026
Same author

A root-soil association index reveals life-history strategies of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi.

The New phytologist·2026
Same author

Evolution of a ZW sex determination system in sticklebacks.

Science advances·2026
Same author

Scalable and robust regression models for continuous proportional data.

Journal of the American Statistical Association·2026
Same author

Assessing the Genetic Health and Conservation Value of an Introduced Urban Population of a Critically Endangered Parrot.

Evolutionary applications·2026
Same author

Fish and Zooplankton Co-Responses to Environmental Gradients Under Different Climate Change Scenarios.

Global change biology·2026
Same journal

Chronic limb loading results in remarkable load carriage economy in growing fowl.

Proceedings. Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Motion-from-structure in face perception: expectations of natural face motion depend on face shape.

Proceedings. Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Unification and generalization of models of zygote survival.

Proceedings. Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Phenological type- and diameter-dependent effects of individual light availability and interannual climate variation on tree growth.

Proceedings. Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Interaction range of common goods shapes Black Queen dynamics beyond the cheater-cooperator narrative.

Proceedings. Biological sciences·2026
Same journal

Stingray spine diversity reflects performance trade-offs linked to puncture and breakability.

Proceedings. Biological sciences·2026
See all related articles

Bayesian and frequentist methods for estimating quantitative genetic parameters, like additive and dominance variances, were compared. Ignoring genetic dominance can bias additive variance estimates, especially in small evolutionary datasets.

Area of Science:

  • Evolutionary quantitative genetics
  • Animal breeding sciences

Background:

  • Bayesian approaches are common in animal breeding but rare in evolutionary quantitative genetics.
  • Estimating quantitative genetic parameters (additive and dominance variances) is crucial for understanding evolution.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Compare Bayesian and frequentist methods for estimating quantitative genetic parameters.
  • Assess the impact of dataset size and genetic architecture on parameter estimation.
  • Develop robust methods for G-matrix comparisons in evolutionary studies.

Main Methods:

  • Comparison of Bayesian and frequentist approaches for estimating additive and dominance variance matrices.
  • Analysis of datasets typical of evolutionary studies with varying genetic architectures.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Development of a Monte Carlo method for computing fraternity coefficients.
  • Illustration using data from the common frog (Rana temporaria) and Siberian jay (Perisoreus infaustus).

    • Main Results:

    • Disentangling genetic components is challenging with small datasets.
    • Ignoring genetic dominance leads to biased estimates of additive variance.
    • A novel summary statistic for G-matrix comparisons based on multinormal distributions was proposed.
    • Approximate fraternity coefficients can be substantially biased.

    Conclusions:

    • Bayesian methods offer a valuable framework for evolutionary quantitative genetics.
    • Accurate estimation of genetic variances requires careful consideration of all genetic components, including dominance.
    • The proposed methods enhance the analysis of G-matrices and fraternity coefficients in evolutionary studies.