A community-maintained standard library of population genetic models
- University of Oregon, United States
- University of Oxford, United Kingdom
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, United States
- University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, United States
- University of Copenhagen, Denmark
- University of California, Los Angeles, United States
- McGill University, Canada
- University of Melbourne, Australia
- University of Freiburg, Germany
- University of Washington, United States
- Arizona State University, United States
- IDC Herzliya, Israel
- Stanford University, United States
- Columbia University, United States
- Cornell University, United States
- ITMO University, Russian Federation
- National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico
- University of Arizona, United States
Abstract
The explosion in population genomic data demands ever more complex modes of analysis, and increasingly these analyses depend on sophisticated simulations. Re-cent advances in population genetic simulation have made it possible to simulate large and complex models, but specifying such models for a particular simulation engine remains a difficult and error-prone task. Computational genetics researchers currently re-implement simulation models independently, leading to inconsistency and duplication of effort. This situation presents a major barrier to empirical researchers seeking to use simulations for power analyses of upcoming studies or sanity checks on existing genomic data. Population genetics, as a field, also lacks standard benchmarks by which new tools for inference might be measured. Here we describe a new resource, stdpopsim, that attempts to rectify this situation. Stdpopsim is a community-driven open source project, which provides easy access to a growing catalog of published simulation models from a range of organisms and supports multiple simulation engine backends. This resource is available as a well-documented python library with a simple command-line interface. We share some examples demonstrating how stdpopsim can be used to systematically compare demographic inference methods, and we encourage a broader community of developers to contribute to this growing resource.
Data availability
All resources are available from https://github.com/popsim-consortium/stdpopsim
Article and author information
Author details
Christopher B Cole
Funding
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM119856)
- Christopher C Kyriazis
- Kirk E Lohmueller
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM117241)
- Jeffrey R Adrion
- Andrew D Kern
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM127348)
- Travis J Struck
- Ryan N Gutenkunst
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R00HG008696)
- Ariella L Gladstein
- Daniel R Schrider
National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35GM127070)
- Noah Dukler
- Adam Siepel
National Human Genome Research Institute (R01HG010346)
- Noah Dukler
- Adam Siepel
Villum Fonden (00025300)
- Graham Gower
- Fernando Racimo
UC MEXUS-CONACYT
- Diego Ortega Del Vecchyo
Robertson Foundation
- Jerome Kelleher
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Copyright
© 2020, Adrion et al.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.
Metrics
-
- 6,536
- views
-
- 663
- downloads
-
- 147
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.
Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)
Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)
Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)
A community-maintained standard library of population genetic models
eLife 9:e54967.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.54967
Further reading
-
- Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
- Computational and Systems Biology
Protein–protein interactions are fundamental to understanding the molecular functions and regulation of proteins. Despite the availability of extensive databases, many interactions remain uncharacterized due to the labor-intensive nature of experimental validation. In this study, we utilized the AlphaFold2 program to predict interactions among proteins localized in the nuage, a germline-specific non-membrane organelle essential for piRNA biogenesis in Drosophila. We screened 20 nuage proteins for 1:1 interactions and predicted dimer structures. Among these, five represented novel interaction candidates. Three pairs, including Spn-E_Squ, were verified by co-immunoprecipitation. Disruption of the salt bridges at the Spn-E_Squ interface confirmed their functional importance, underscoring the predictive model’s accuracy. We extended our analysis to include interactions between three representative nuage components—Vas, Squ, and Tej—and approximately 430 oogenesis-related proteins. Co-immunoprecipitation verified interactions for three pairs: Mei-W68_Squ, CSN3_Squ, and Pka-C1_Tej. Furthermore, we screened the majority of Drosophila proteins (~12,000) for potential interaction with the Piwi protein, a central player in the piRNA pathway, identifying 164 pairs as potential binding partners. This in silico approach not only efficiently identifies potential interaction partners but also significantly bridges the gap by facilitating the integration of bioinformatics and experimental biology.
-
- Computational and Systems Biology
- Neuroscience
Accumulating evidence to make decisions is a core cognitive function. Previous studies have tended to estimate accumulation using either neural or behavioral data alone. Here, we develop a unified framework for modeling stimulus-driven behavior and multi-neuron activity simultaneously. We applied our method to choices and neural recordings from three rat brain regions—the posterior parietal cortex (PPC), the frontal orienting fields (FOF), and the anterior-dorsal striatum (ADS)—while subjects performed a pulse-based accumulation task. Each region was best described by a distinct accumulation model, which all differed from the model that best described the animal’s choices. FOF activity was consistent with an accumulator where early evidence was favored while the ADS reflected near perfect accumulation. Neural responses within an accumulation framework unveiled a distinct association between each brain region and choice. Choices were better predicted from all regions using a comprehensive, accumulation-based framework and different brain regions were found to differentially reflect choice-related accumulation signals: FOF and ADS both reflected choice but ADS showed more instances of decision vacillation. Previous studies relating neural data to behaviorally inferred accumulation dynamics have implicitly assumed that individual brain regions reflect the whole-animal level accumulator. Our results suggest that different brain regions represent accumulated evidence in dramatically different ways and that accumulation at the whole-animal level may be constructed from a variety of neural-level accumulators.
