Skip to main content
. 2004 Dec;168(4):2227–2244. doi: 10.1534/genetics.103.022830

Figure 8.—

Figure 8.—

Effect of image number on the coalescence time probability distribution. The distribution of coalescence times was determined using three different choices for the number of images (m = 4, 17, and 50). The habitat is a 10 × 10 square with ρ = 100 and σ = 0.3 (N = 10,000; Nb = 113). The samples are from adjacent locations at (1.95, 2.0) and (2.05, 2.0). The effective population size from Equation 6 is 10,669. The transition times were determined from Equation 7: τ = 308 for m = 4; τ = 454 for m = 17; τ = 759 for m = 50. Crosses indicate the probability distribution determined from 100,000 simulated coalescence times. Older coalescence rates represent the average rate over a range centered on that marker. For example, the mark at t = 30 represents the average rate from t = 25–35; the mark at t = 3000 is the average from t = 2500–3500. The predicted coalescence probability distribution is very similar for the different values of m except in the vicinity of the transition between the scattering and collecting phases. The dip in the analytic values at t = 2 results from the fact that this probability distribution was derived by subtracting the CDF at t − 1 from the CDF at t. The CDF determined by Equation 2 significantly underestimates the probability of coalescence for very small values of T, and the value of the CDF at T = 1 was taken simply to be 1/Nb.