Skip to main content
PMC home page
Genetics logoLink to Genetics
. 1996 Dec;144(4):2001–2014. doi: 10.1093/genetics/144.4.2001

Description and Power Analysis of Two Tests for Detecting Recent Population Bottlenecks from Allele Frequency Data

J M Cornuet 1, G Luikart 1
PMCID: PMC1207747  PMID: 8978083

Abstract

When a population experiences a reduction of its effective size, it generally develops a heterozygosity excess at selectively neutral loci, i.e., the heterozygosity computed from a sample of genes is larger than the heterozygosity expected from the number of alleles found in the sample if the population were at mutation drift equilibrium. The heterozygosity excess persists only a certain number of generations until a new equilibrium is established. Two statistical tests for detecting a heterozygosity excess are described. They require measurements of the number of alleles and heterozygosity at each of several loci from a population sample. The first test determines if the proportion of loci with heterozygosity excess is significantly larger than expected at equilibrium. The second test establishes if the average of standardized differences between observed and expected heterozygosities is significantly different from zero. Type I and II errors have been evaluated by computer simulations, varying sample size, number of loci, bottleneck size, time elapsed since the beginning of the bottleneck and level of variability of loci. These analyses show that the most useful markers for bottleneck detection are those evolving under the infinite allele model (IAM) and they provide guidelines for selecting sample sizes of individuals and loci. The usefulness of these tests for conservation biology is discussed.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (3.9 MB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bonnel M. L., Selander R. K. Elephant seals: genetic variation and near extinction. Science. 1974 May 24;184(4139):908–909. doi: 10.1126/science.184.4139.908. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bryant E. H., McCommas S. A., Combs L. M. The Effect of an Experimental Bottleneck upon Quantitative Genetic Variation in the Housefly. Genetics. 1986 Dec;114(4):1191–1211. doi: 10.1093/genetics/114.4.1191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. CARSON H. L. Genetic conditions which promote or retard the formation of species. Cold Spring Harb Symp Quant Biol. 1959;24:87–105. doi: 10.1101/sqb.1959.024.01.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chakraborty R., Jin L. Heterozygote deficiency, population substructure and their implications in DNA fingerprinting. Hum Genet. 1992 Jan;88(3):267–272. doi: 10.1007/BF00197257. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Deka R., Chakroborty R., Ferrell R. E. A population genetic study of six VNTR loci in three ethnically defined populations. Genomics. 1991 Sep;11(1):83–92. doi: 10.1016/0888-7543(91)90104-m. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Di Rienzo A., Peterson A. C., Garza J. C., Valdes A. M., Slatkin M., Freimer N. B. Mutational processes of simple-sequence repeat loci in human populations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1994 Apr 12;91(8):3166–3170. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.8.3166. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Estoup A., Solignac M., Cornuet J. M., Goudet J., Scholl A. Genetic differentiation of continental and island populations of Bombus terrestris (Hymenoptera: Apidae) in Europe. Mol Ecol. 1996 Feb;5(1):19–31. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294x.1996.tb00288.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Estoup A., Tailliez C., Cornuet J. M., Solignac M. Size homoplasy and mutational processes of interrupted microsatellites in two bee species, Apis mellifera and Bombus terrestris (Apidae). Mol Biol Evol. 1995 Nov;12(6):1074–1084. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040282. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Ewens W. J. The sampling theory of selectively neutral alleles. Theor Popul Biol. 1972 Mar;3(1):87–112. doi: 10.1016/0040-5809(72)90035-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gottelli D., Sillero-Zubiri C., Applebaum G. D., Roy M. S., Girman D. J., Garcia-Moreno J., Ostrander E. A., Wayne R. K. Molecular genetics of the most endangered canid: the Ethiopian wolf Canis simensis. Mol Ecol. 1994 Aug;3(4):301–312. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294x.1994.tb00070.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jiménez J. A., Hughes K. A., Alaks G., Graham L., Lacy R. C. An experimental study of inbreeding depression in a natural habitat. Science. 1994 Oct 14;266(5183):271–273. doi: 10.1126/science.7939661. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. KIMURA M., CROW J. F. THE NUMBER OF ALLELES THAT CAN BE MAINTAINED IN A FINITE POPULATION. Genetics. 1964 Apr;49:725–738. doi: 10.1093/genetics/49.4.725. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Karl S. A., Avise J. C. Balancing selection at allozyme loci in oysters: implications from nuclear RFLPs. Science. 1992 Apr 3;256(5053):100–102. doi: 10.1126/science.1348870. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. O'Brien S. J., Wildt D. E., Bush M., Caro T. M., FitzGibbon C., Aggundey I., Leakey R. E. East African cheetahs: evidence for two population bottlenecks? Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1987 Jan;84(2):508–511. doi: 10.1073/pnas.84.2.508. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Ohta T., Kimura M. A model of mutation appropriate to estimate the number of electrophoretically detectable alleles in a finite population. Genet Res. 1973 Oct;22(2):201–204. doi: 10.1017/s0016672300012994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Pemberton J. M., Smith R. H. Lack of biochemical polymorphism in British fallow deer. Heredity (Edinb) 1985 Oct;55(Pt 2):199–207. doi: 10.1038/hdy.1985.92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Randi E., Apollonio M. Low biochemical variability in European fallow deer (Dama dama L.): natural bottlenecks and the effects of domestication. Heredity (Edinb) 1988 Dec;61(Pt 3):405–410. doi: 10.1038/hdy.1988.131. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Rogers A. R., Harpending H. Population growth makes waves in the distribution of pairwise genetic differences. Mol Biol Evol. 1992 May;9(3):552–569. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040727. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Shriver M. D., Jin L., Chakraborty R., Boerwinkle E. VNTR allele frequency distributions under the stepwise mutation model: a computer simulation approach. Genetics. 1993 Jul;134(3):983–993. doi: 10.1093/genetics/134.3.983. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Tajima F. Evolutionary relationship of DNA sequences in finite populations. Genetics. 1983 Oct;105(2):437–460. doi: 10.1093/genetics/105.2.437. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Taylor A. C., Sherwin W. B., Wayne R. K. Genetic variation of microsatellite loci in a bottlenecked species: the northern hairy-nosed wombat Lasiorhinus krefftii. Mol Ecol. 1994 Aug;3(4):277–290. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-294x.1994.tb00068.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Valdes A. M., Slatkin M., Freimer N. B. Allele frequencies at microsatellite loci: the stepwise mutation model revisited. Genetics. 1993 Mar;133(3):737–749. doi: 10.1093/genetics/133.3.737. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Zouros E. Mutation rates, population sizes and amounts of electrophoretic variation of enzyme loci in natural populations. Genetics. 1979 Jun;92(2):623–646. doi: 10.1093/genetics/92.2.623. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Genetics are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES