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)