Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Mean estimates of genetic diversity and relatedness

From: First report of an exophilic Anopheles arabiensis population in Bissau City, Guinea-Bissau: recent introduction or sampling bias?

   A R H e F IS R LR R QG R ML
Anopheles arabiensis Adults 5.7 0.583 -0.054 0.054 0.304 17.9
(N = 20) [4.5-6.9] [0.431-0.708] [-0.132-0.017] [0.042-0.063] [0.279-0.327] [12.9-24.3]
Larvae 5.8 0.598 0.024 0.049 0.268 18.3
(N = 122) [4.7-6.8] [0.455-0.706] [-0.013-0.064] [0.047-0.050] [0.264-0.272] [17.5-19.3]
Anopheles coluzzii Larvae 8.8 0.812 0.017 0.023 0.027 6.5
(N = 22) [7.5-10.5] [0.745-0.870] [-0.052-0.086] [0.017-0.030] [0.009-0.047] [3.8-10.7]
Anopheles gambiae Adults 10.0 0.819 0.082 0.019 0.022 9.8
(N = 48) [8.1-11.9] [0.767-0.864] [0.055-0.113] [0.016-0.021] [0.013-0.031] [8.1-11.7]
Larvae 9.7 0.812 0.079 0.015 0.020 10.0
(N = 53) [7.9-11.7] [0.756-0.863] [0.022-0.130] [0.013-0.019] [0.012-0.028] [8.5-11.8]
  1. N: sample size; A R : allele richness; H e : expected heterozygosity; FIS: inbreeding coefficient; RLR: Lynch and Ritland [54] relatedness coefficient; RQG: Queller and Goodnight [53] relatedness coefficient; RML: proportion (in percentage) of related pairs of individuals as determined by ML-RELATE. Significant estimates after correction of multiple tests for FIS, RLR and RQG are in bold. 95% confidence intervals are in square brackets.