Skip to main content
. 2022 Nov 5;13:6668. doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-34383-6

Fig. 2. Validation of the PofO inference.

Fig. 2

a Call rate (x-axis) and error rate (y-axis) as a function of (i) the minimal length of IBD tracks for scaffold construction and (ii) the minimal phasing probability used to call a heterozygote as phased. Each point corresponds to a given phasing probability threshold going from 0.5 (right most point) to 1.0 (left most point) with steps of 0.05. The grey arrow indicates the parameters we used in our analysis (3 cM long IBD tracks and 0.7 minimal phasing probability). b Call rate (left y-axis) and error rate (right y-axis) as a function of the composition of the parental groups (x-axis). The latter ranges from one parental group with one surrogate parent (left) to two parental groups comprising multiple surrogate parents (right). c Fraction of targets as a function of the composition of the parental groups (x-axis): in the validation data (N = 1399) in gray and in the call set (N = 21,484) in black. d Error rate (top panel; y-axis) and call rate (bottom panel; y-axis) per variant site as a function of their normalized positions relative to each telomere (x-axes). Red lines are fitted density curves. Error rates greater than 10% are capped to 11% as indicated by the dashed gray line. e Distribution of error rates per number of variant sites (y-axis, log scale). f Fraction of samples (purple) and heterozygotes (i.e., call rate; orange) in the call set for which PofO is inferred, as a function of chromosome length (cM, x-axis). Chromosome numbers are shown next to the points in black. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.