Skip to main content
. 2013 Apr 4;160(7):1709–1721. doi: 10.1007/s00227-013-2223-7

Table 4.

Comparison of IM runs for M. trossulus and M. galloprovincialis

Samples s tu q
Est LO HI Est LO HI Est LO HI
BUS–MED 0.02 0.00 0.06 0.24 0.07 0.44 233 174 297
LET–NSC 0.23 0.02 0.63 0.43 0.08 0.98 105 70 145

95 % confidence intervals are shown along with the estimated value of three indices: population split parameter s, time since the divergence tu and the effective population size parameter q