HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (15) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Culley, T. M. Articles by Crawford, D. J. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Culley, T. M. Articles by Crawford, D. J. Agricola Articles by Culley, T. M. Articles by Crawford, D. J.

A comparison of two methods of calculating G_ST, a genetic measure of population differentiation¹

Department of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology, The Ohio State University, 1735 Neil Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1293 USA

G_ST is a genetic statistic describing differentiation of populations and has frequently been compared with Hamrick and Godt's (1989) review of the plant literature. We show here that some comparisons may be inappropriate if G_ST was calculated in a different way than that used by Hamrick and Godt (HG). An alternative method advocated by Nei is mathematically different from the HG technique, occasionally resulting in different G_ST values. We reviewed 695 studies that appeared between 1990 and September 1999 that cited Hamrick and Godt (1989) and found that many of these calculated G_ST according to Nei's method (46%), with the majority of these papers (61%) including comparisons to Hamrick and Godt's review. We suggest that if G_ST estimates are compared across studies, it is most appropriate to calculate them the same way. However, we found that in most cases, the magnitude of difference in G_ST values was small, suggesting that qualitative comparisons of G_ST estimates between most studies are probably valid. Nevertheless, we have identified theoretical and empirical situations in which large differences in G_ST values are likely to arise. Thus, we advise future investigators to carefully consider which method to use in calculating G_ST for a given data set.

Key Words: genetic variation • G_ST • Hamrick and Godt • population differentiation

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. C. Johnson, T. J. Kisha, and M. A. Evans Characterizing Safflower Germplasm with AFLP Molecular Markers Crop Sci., July 30, 2007; 47(4): 1728 - 1736. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. MANDAK, K. BIMOVA, I. PLACKOVA, V. MAHELKA, and J. CHRTEK Loss of Genetic Variation in Geographically Marginal Populations of Atriplex tatarica (Chenopodiaceae) Ann. Bot., October 1, 2005; 96(5): 901 - 912. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. T. Tercek, D. P. Hauber, and S. P. Darwin Genetic and historical relationships among geothermally adapted Agrostis (bentgrass) of North America and Kamchatka: evidence for a previously unrecognized, thermally adapted taxon Am. J. Botany, September 1, 2003; 90(9): 1306 - 1312. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]