Supporting Information for Zeng and Charlesworth, 2009

Supporting Information

• Supporting Information - Figures S1-S11 and Table S1 (PDF, 964 KB)
• Figure S1 - Accuracy of Equation 7 (PDF, 260 KB)
• Figure S2 - S2.—Proportion of sites fixed for A (the preferred allele) after a recent population shrinkage (PDF, 92 KB)
• Figure S3 - S3.—Performance of the Maside et al. method in the presence of mutational bias (PDF, 84 KB)
• Figure S4 - Power of the Maside et al. method to reject neutrality after a recent population shrinkage (PDF, 96 KB)
• Figure S5 - Performance of the L₀ method in a population that has experienced a recent size expansion (PDF, 184 KB)
• Figure S6 - Performance of the L₀ method in a population that has experienced a recent size reduction (PDF, 180 KB)
• Figure S7 - Goodness of fit of the L₀ model to the observed data (PDF, 72 KB)
• Figure S8 - Performance of the Akashi-Schaeffer method in a population that has experienced a recent size expansion (PDF, 108 KB)
• Figure S9 - Performance of the Akashi-Schaeffer method in a population that has experienced a recent size reduction (PDF, 108 KB)
• Figure S10 - Performance of the Cutter-Charlesworth method in a population that has experienced a recent size expansion (PDF, 108 KB)
• Figure S11 - Performance of the Cutter-Charlesworth method in a population that has experienced a recent size reduction (PDF, 116 KB)
• Table S1 - Dependence of the results on the size of the transition matrix (PDF, 68 KB)