Current approaches using genetic distances produce poor estimates of landscape resistance to interindividual dispersal

Tabitha A. Graves, Paul Beier, J. Andrew Royle

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

64 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Landscape resistance reflects how difficult it is for genes to move across an area with particular attributes (e.g. land cover, slope). An increasingly popular approach to estimate resistance uses Mantel and partial Mantel tests or causal modelling to relate observed genetic distances to effective distances under alternative sets of resistance parameters. Relatively few alternative sets of resistance parameters are tested, leading to relatively poor coverage of the parameter space. Although this approach does not explicitly model key stochastic processes of gene flow, including mating, dispersal, drift and inheritance, bias and precision of the resulting resistance parameters have not been assessed. We formally describe the most commonly used model as a set of equations and provide a formal approach for estimating resistance parameters. Our optimization finds the maximum Mantel r when an optimum exists and identifies the same resistance values as current approaches when the alternatives evaluated are near the optimum. Unfortunately, even where an optimum existed, estimates from the most commonly used model were imprecise and were typically much smaller than the simulated true resistance to dispersal. Causal modelling using Mantel significance tests also typically failed to support the true resistance to dispersal values. For a large range of scenarios, current approaches using a simple correlational model between genetic and effective distances do not yield accurate estimates of resistance to dispersal. We suggest that analysts consider the processes important to gene flow for their study species, model those processes explicitly and evaluate the quality of estimates resulting from their model.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3888-3903
Number of pages16
JournalMolecular Ecology
Volume22
Issue number15
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2013

Fingerprint

Gene Flow
genetic distance
Stochastic Processes
Genetic Models
gene flow
Genes
stochasticity
modeling
stochastic processes
land cover
parameter
inheritance (genetics)
gene
testing

Keywords

  • causal modelling
  • connectivity
  • dispersal landscape genetics
  • Mantel test
  • resistance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
  • Genetics

Cite this

Current approaches using genetic distances produce poor estimates of landscape resistance to interindividual dispersal. / Graves, Tabitha A.; Beier, Paul; Royle, J. Andrew.

In: Molecular Ecology, Vol. 22, No. 15, 08.2013, p. 3888-3903.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8b687937da6c48539202de47c98f26a1,
title = "Current approaches using genetic distances produce poor estimates of landscape resistance to interindividual dispersal",
abstract = "Landscape resistance reflects how difficult it is for genes to move across an area with particular attributes (e.g. land cover, slope). An increasingly popular approach to estimate resistance uses Mantel and partial Mantel tests or causal modelling to relate observed genetic distances to effective distances under alternative sets of resistance parameters. Relatively few alternative sets of resistance parameters are tested, leading to relatively poor coverage of the parameter space. Although this approach does not explicitly model key stochastic processes of gene flow, including mating, dispersal, drift and inheritance, bias and precision of the resulting resistance parameters have not been assessed. We formally describe the most commonly used model as a set of equations and provide a formal approach for estimating resistance parameters. Our optimization finds the maximum Mantel r when an optimum exists and identifies the same resistance values as current approaches when the alternatives evaluated are near the optimum. Unfortunately, even where an optimum existed, estimates from the most commonly used model were imprecise and were typically much smaller than the simulated true resistance to dispersal. Causal modelling using Mantel significance tests also typically failed to support the true resistance to dispersal values. For a large range of scenarios, current approaches using a simple correlational model between genetic and effective distances do not yield accurate estimates of resistance to dispersal. We suggest that analysts consider the processes important to gene flow for their study species, model those processes explicitly and evaluate the quality of estimates resulting from their model.",
keywords = "causal modelling, connectivity, dispersal landscape genetics, Mantel test, resistance",
author = "Graves, {Tabitha A.} and Paul Beier and Royle, {J. Andrew}",
year = "2013",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1111/mec.12348",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "22",
pages = "3888--3903",
journal = "Molecular Ecology",
issn = "0962-1083",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "15",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Current approaches using genetic distances produce poor estimates of landscape resistance to interindividual dispersal

AU - Graves, Tabitha A.

AU - Beier, Paul

AU - Royle, J. Andrew

PY - 2013/8

Y1 - 2013/8

N2 - Landscape resistance reflects how difficult it is for genes to move across an area with particular attributes (e.g. land cover, slope). An increasingly popular approach to estimate resistance uses Mantel and partial Mantel tests or causal modelling to relate observed genetic distances to effective distances under alternative sets of resistance parameters. Relatively few alternative sets of resistance parameters are tested, leading to relatively poor coverage of the parameter space. Although this approach does not explicitly model key stochastic processes of gene flow, including mating, dispersal, drift and inheritance, bias and precision of the resulting resistance parameters have not been assessed. We formally describe the most commonly used model as a set of equations and provide a formal approach for estimating resistance parameters. Our optimization finds the maximum Mantel r when an optimum exists and identifies the same resistance values as current approaches when the alternatives evaluated are near the optimum. Unfortunately, even where an optimum existed, estimates from the most commonly used model were imprecise and were typically much smaller than the simulated true resistance to dispersal. Causal modelling using Mantel significance tests also typically failed to support the true resistance to dispersal values. For a large range of scenarios, current approaches using a simple correlational model between genetic and effective distances do not yield accurate estimates of resistance to dispersal. We suggest that analysts consider the processes important to gene flow for their study species, model those processes explicitly and evaluate the quality of estimates resulting from their model.

AB - Landscape resistance reflects how difficult it is for genes to move across an area with particular attributes (e.g. land cover, slope). An increasingly popular approach to estimate resistance uses Mantel and partial Mantel tests or causal modelling to relate observed genetic distances to effective distances under alternative sets of resistance parameters. Relatively few alternative sets of resistance parameters are tested, leading to relatively poor coverage of the parameter space. Although this approach does not explicitly model key stochastic processes of gene flow, including mating, dispersal, drift and inheritance, bias and precision of the resulting resistance parameters have not been assessed. We formally describe the most commonly used model as a set of equations and provide a formal approach for estimating resistance parameters. Our optimization finds the maximum Mantel r when an optimum exists and identifies the same resistance values as current approaches when the alternatives evaluated are near the optimum. Unfortunately, even where an optimum existed, estimates from the most commonly used model were imprecise and were typically much smaller than the simulated true resistance to dispersal. Causal modelling using Mantel significance tests also typically failed to support the true resistance to dispersal values. For a large range of scenarios, current approaches using a simple correlational model between genetic and effective distances do not yield accurate estimates of resistance to dispersal. We suggest that analysts consider the processes important to gene flow for their study species, model those processes explicitly and evaluate the quality of estimates resulting from their model.

KW - causal modelling

KW - connectivity

KW - dispersal landscape genetics

KW - Mantel test

KW - resistance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84880825461&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84880825461&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/mec.12348

DO - 10.1111/mec.12348

M3 - Article

C2 - 23786212

AN - SCOPUS:84880825461

VL - 22

SP - 3888

EP - 3903

JO - Molecular Ecology

JF - Molecular Ecology

SN - 0962-1083

IS - 15

ER -