Skip to main content

Table 1 Subpopulations of sperm differ in allelic content

From: Unique sperm haplotypes are associated with phenotypically different sperm subpopulations in Astyanax fish

  Filter  % of Dataset      Two-tailed
  Angle (degrees) Retained HET HOM P(HET) Binomial p =
SubPop 1 15 2.8 14 13 0.519 1
17.5 3.1 17 13 0.567 0.585
20 3.9 20 17 0.541 0.743
22.5 4.8 24 22 0.522 0.883
25 6.6 31 32 0.492 1
27.5 9 37 49 0.430 0.235
30 12.6 54 67 0.446 0.275
SubPop 2 15 1.6 10 9 0.526 1
17.5 2 11 12 0.478 1
20 2.7 17 14 0.548 0.72
22.5 4.2 29 19 0.604 0.193
25 5.8 42 25 0.627 0.05
27.5 8.9 67 36 0.650 2.92E−03
30 13.5 104 51 0.671 2.49E−05
SubPop 3 15 1.3 9 1 0.900 0.0215
17.5 2.3 12 6 0.667 0.238
20 3.7 20 8 0.714 0.035
22.5 4.3 23 10 0.697 0.0351
25 6.3 31 17 0.646 0.059
27.5 9.4 49 23 0.681 0.00294
30 14.5 68 43 0.613 0.022
SubPops 2 and 3 15 1.5 19 10 0.655 0.136
17.5 2.1 23 18 0.561 0.533
20 3.1 37 22 0.627 0.067
22.5 4.2 52 29 0.642 0.015
25 6 73 42 0.635 0.00511
27.5 9.1 116 59 0.663 1.97E−05
30 13.9 172 94 0.647 2.00E−06
  1. The three subpopulations are defined in the text. The angle sets the stringency of the filter to screen out intermediate wells. The stringency’s affect is reflected in the percentage of wells in the dataset that pass the filter and are retained for downstream analysis. Numbers of wells determined by genotyping to have HET or HOM combinations and the proportion of HET are listed in columns 4 to 6. The last column lists the two tailed binomial probability of the null hypothesis: P(HET) = P(HOM). In subpopulations 2 and 3, but not in subpopulation 1, there are significant departures from the null, with P(HET) > P(HOM)