Skip to main content
. 2016 Feb 24;203(1):119–131. doi: 10.1534/genetics.115.185579

Table 3. Comparisons of ancestral inference between TetraOrigin and H2013 for the 14 simulation scenarios (Table 1).

Data set No = 100, Nt = 75 No = 100, Nt = 300
TetraOrigin (bvModel) TetraOrigin (fullModel) H2013 TetraOrigin (bvModel) TetraOrigin (fullModel) H2013
DStd-M 0.061 0.061 0.144 0.015 0.015 0.023
DPref-M 0.060 0.060 0.136 0.014 0.014 0.022
DQuad-M 0.164 0.062 N/A 0.122 0.012 N/A
DPrefQuad-M 0.146 0.065 N/A 0.101 0.013 N/A
DStd-01 0.157 0.157 0.329 0.038 0.038 0.053
DStd-02 0.126 0.126 0.222 0.027 0.027 0.036
DStd-11 0.059 0.059 0.149 0.013 0.013 0.022
DStd-12 0.043 0.043 0.114 0.011 0.011 0.018
DStd-13 0.060 0.060 0.158 0.014 0.014 0.023
DStd-22 0.042 0.043 0.098 0.008 0.008 0.016
DStd-M-V0.25 0.064 0.064 0.148 0.014 0.014 0.021
DStd-M-V1 0.067 0.067 0.155 0.015 0.015 0.025
DStd-M-Local 0.100 0.101 0.171 0.020 0.020 0.026
DStd-M-Long 0.222 0.229 0.287 0.097 0.107 0.066

For each scenario, two sub–data sets are specified by the number No = 100 offspring and the number Nt = 75 or 300 markers. Each cell gives the wrongly assigned probability conditional on the true parental haplotypes. The DQuad-M and DPrefQuad-M data sets could not be analyzed with H2013.