Supporting information for Harr et al. (2002) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 10.1073/pnas.202336899

 

Table 7. Results of likelihood ratio test [Kim, Y. & Stephan, W. (2002) Genetics 160, 765–777]

Simulation

C = 4Nr

q

Option 1 (derived alleles/non-derived alleles distinguished)

Option 2 (derived alleles/non-derived alleles not distinguished)

LR

2Ns

X

s

LR

2Ns

X

s

Sweep region 1

1*

0.0185

0.0087

84.2

9035.1

2491474

0.0045

85.8

10728.7

2491442

0.0054

2

0.0185

0.0043

36.0

5604.9

2487488

0.0028

35.0

6626.9

2487344

0.0033

3

0.0185

0.0173

195.0

13422.0

2491535

0.0067

200.4

15789.9

2491480

0.0079

4

0.0093

0.0087

84.2

4071.8

2491449

0.0020

85.7

4940.4

2491437

0.0025

5

0.037

0.0087

84.2

19468.2

2491405

0.0097

85.7

23149.7

2491526

0.0116

Sweep region 2

1*

0.0185

0.0087

23.6

1083.0

2661027

0.0005

22.3

957.3

2661004

0.0005

2

0.0185

0.0043

9.19

291.9

2661024

0.0001

8.44

281.5

2661053

0.0001

3

0.0185

0.0173

64.8

3426.9

2662380

0.0017

61.2

2550.9

2661132

0.0013

4

0.0093

0.0087

23.5

447.6

2661012

0.0002

22.3

422.3

2661104

0.0002

5

0.037

0.0087

23.5

2914.2

2660930

0.0015

22.3

2131.4

2661118

0.0011

X

, position of selected mutation on the chromosome (according to release 2 of the complete Drosophila genome); s, selection coefficient; LR, likelihood ratio.

*Standard parameter, estimated from non-African polymorphism in frag.1, frag.4, and frag.7.

All simulations fitted the hitchhiking model significantly better than the neutral model [P (LR) < 0.05].

Based on an effective population size (Ne) of 106.