-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 92
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
QC for HolsteinFriesian_1B16 (BosTau) #1598
Comments
This looks good - it makes sense to deal with all these at once. Can you put up the personal communication somehow? At least, enough that the QC'er can use the same values? For instance: paste it into the issue above? |
Here are Ne&time values for HolsteinFriesian_1B16 |
Here are Ne&time values for Fleckvieh_1B16 |
Here are Ne&time values for Jersey_1B16 |
Here are Ne&time values for Angus_1B16 |
For the QC volunteer, above 4 posts have a file with Ne & time values, while other model parameters (mut rate, rec rate, generation interval) are pulled from various pages in the original publication - I have noted these pages in the description of each model - for example, see
|
I have checked the Ne values and times against the TXT files posted above. Have also checked the other parameters against the paper. All looking correct to me! |
When running the unit tests on my fork, I got various warnings. This is before writing any code myself. Some of the warnings are related to the models added here. Particularly the warnings about different model-specific recombination rates and contig-specific ones. It is not obvious to me what causes these. Any suggestions, @petrelharp or somebody else?
|
Hmm ... @hannesbecher the first few seem to be an issue with the cached genetic maps. Did you try:
After deleting the possibly corrupted file, try running the tests with a single core ( The other warnings seem to be related to @gregorgorjanc's new addition of a model-specific recombination rate-- I'm guessing what's going on here is that these tests are for the mitochondrion, which has recombination rate 0, and this is getting substituted instead of the model-specific recombination rate with a warning. If you run |
Happy to improve tests - I took tests for model specific mutation rate and adapted them to model specific recombination rate and assumed that those warnings are ok!? @hannesbecher let us know what |
I think the warnings are fine (if I'm right about what's going on) -- we'd probably just want to catch them with pytest for the unit tests, to reduce noise. |
PR for new model: this is for four separate BosTau models: HolsteinFriesian_1B16, Fleckvieh_1B16, Jersey_1B16, and Angus_1B16, all from the same source (see paper below), as implemented in #1593
Original paper: https://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1005877
Population indices: each model has only one population, that changes with time
Potential issues that might lead to differences between the model implementations:
I contacted the lead author (Simon Boitard), who shared Ne values from his published plots (so I didn't need to eyeball them from the plot). Note that the plots reported fewer values, so this implementation goes further into the past than shown in plots. The past for the 4 population seems to "merge" onto the similar values, as we would expect - these populations all share common ancestry back in time, but we keep the models separate as they have been inferred separately.
I am pasting the shared files below in discussion for the purpose of QC - will paste one population per post to avoid confusion.
QC'er requests: {tag potential developers to QC the model} TODO: any volunteers?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: