Skip to main content
. 2012 Dec 20;8(12):e1003090. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003090

Figure 3. Comparison of the results of LDhelmet and LDhat for 25 datasets simulated under strong positive selection.

Figure 3

In each plot, different colors represent the results for different datasets. The left and right columns show the estimated recombination maps of LDhelmet and LDhat, respectively, using the same block penalty of 50. In each simulation, the selected site was placed at position Inline graphic kb and the population-scaled selection coefficient was set to Inline graphic. The fixation time of the selected site was Inline graphic coalescent unit in the past. Although the estimated recombination maps are in general noisier than that for the neutral case (c.f., Figure 1), LDhelmet is more robust than LDhat. As illustrated in the plots, LDhat produces false inference of elevated recombination rates near the selected site more frequently than does LDhelmet. The same scenarios of recombination patterns as in Figure 1 were considered: (First Row) with a constant recombination rate of Inline graphic per bp, and (Second Row) with a hotspot of width Inline graphic kb starting at location 11.5 kb. The background recombination rate was Inline graphic per bp, while the hotspot intensity was Inline graphic the background rate, i.e., Inline graphic per bp. The maps are shown in their entirety, including potential edge effects.