Assessing the performance of qpAdm

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,325
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
Like I said...

See:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.09.032664v1

"[FONT=&quot]qpAdm is a statistical tool for studying the ancestry of populations with histories that involve admixture between two or more source populations. Using qpAdm, it is possible to identify plausible models of admixture that fit the population history of a group of interest and to calculate the relative proportion of ancestry that can be ascribed to each source population in the model. Although qpAdm is widely used in studies of population history of human (and non-human) groups, relatively little has been done to assess its performance. We performed a simulation study to assess the behavior of qpAdm under various scenarios in order to identify areas of potential weakness and establish recommended best practices for use. We find that qpAdm is a robust tool that yields accurate results in many cases, including when data coverage is low, there are high rates of missing data or ancient DNA damage, or when diploid calls cannot be made. However, we caution against co-analyzing ancient and present-day data, the inclusion of an extremely large number of reference populations in a single model, and analyzing population histories involving extended periods of gene flow. We provide a user guide suggesting best practices for the use of qpAdm."[/FONT]which means much of the "modelling" done with it on hobbyist sites is suspect.
 

This thread has been viewed 9566 times.

Back
Top