Skip to main content
. 2013 May 7;8(5):e61265. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0061265

Table 1. Genetic parameters of core subsets selected by different sampling methods at 16% sample size: advanced stochastic local search (ASLS), maximizing (M), maximum length sub-tree (MLST) and random (R).

Subset Code Method/allocation strategy Cv (%) DCE (±SD) He Sh # Trait classes (%) # haplotypes
OWGB Marrakech 279 0.746 (±0.092) 0.728 4.524 213 12
CC1-80 ASLS/Cv1 279 (100) 0.793 (±0.076) 0.77 4.731 206 (96.7) 12 (100)
CC2-80 ASLS/DCE 1 234 (84) 0.833 (±0.07) 0.808 * 4.829 202 (94.8) 11 (91.6)
CC3-80 ASLS/He 1 232 (83) 0.828 (±0.067) 0.814 * 4.839 201 (94.3) 11 (91.6)
CC4-80 ASLS/Sh 1 250 (89.6) 0.825 (±0.068) 0.807 * 4.861 204 (95.7) 11 (91.6)
CC5-80 ASLS/multi 2 265 (95) 0.82 (±0.069) 0.799 * 4.836 205 (96.2) 11 (91.6)
CC6-80 ASLS/DCECv3 279 (100) 0.806 (±0.071) 0.779 4.773 205 (96.2) 11 (91.6)
CC7-80 M 279 (100) 0.804 (±0.07) 0.786 4.773 204 (95.77) 12 (100)
CC8-80 MLST 236 (84.6) 0.817 (±0.061) 0.797* 4.778 205 (96.2) 10 (83.3)
CC9-80 R 202 (72.4)* 0.749 (±0.097) 0.731 4.507 199 (93.4) 10 (83.3)

Four sampling strategies using the ASLS method were found to be the most suitable for comparing different sampling sizes (in bold).

Cv: allelic coverage or number of alleles, DCE: average genetic distance of Cavalli-Sforza and Edwards, SD: standard deviation, He: Nei diversity index, Sh: Shannon-Weaver diversity index.

1

Each parameter was optimized independently by performing 20 runs with 100% weight given to the respective parameters (“Cv strategy”, “DCE”, “Sh”, and “He”).

2

Twenty independent runs were performed with equal weight given to each of the four parameters simultaneously (“multi strategy”).

3

Subset sampled when a weight of 60% was assigned to DCE and 40% to Cv (“DCECv strategy”).

*

Statistically significant difference (p<0.05) using the Mann-Whitney test between core subsets and OWGB Marrakech.