Summary
Conducting computer simulations, Nei and Tateno (1978) have shown that Jukes and Holmquist's (1972) method of estimating the number of nucleotide substitutions tends to give an overestimate and the estimate obtained has a large variance. Holmquist and Conroy (1980) repeated some parts of our simulation and claim that the overestimation of nucleotide substitutions in our paper occurred mainly because we used selected data. Examination of Holmquist and Conroy's simulation indicates that their results are essentially the same as ours when the Jukes-Holmquist method is used, but since they used a different method of computation their estimates of nucleotide substitutions differed substantially from ours. Another problem in Holmquist and Conroy's Letter is that they confused the expected number of nucleotide substitution with the number in a sample. This confusion has resulted in a number of unnecessary arguments. They also criticized ourX 2 measure, but this criticism is apparently due to a misunderstanding of the assumptions of our method and a failure to use our method in the way we described. We believe that our earlier conclusions remain unchanged.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Dayhoff MO (1972) Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure, v 5, Natl Biomed Res Found, Washington
Fitch WF (1972) Brookhaven Symp Biol 23:186
Fitch WF (1980) J Mol Evol 16:1–57
Fitch WF, Margoliash E (1967) Biochemical Genetics 1:65
Holmquist R (1972) J Mol Evol 1:211
Holmquist R (1978) J Mol Evol 11:361
Holmquist R, Conroy T (1981) J Mol Evol 17:167–181
Jukes TH, Holmquist R (1972) J Mol Biol 64:163
Nei M, Tateno Y (1978) J Mol Evol 11:333
Nei M, Tateno Y (1979) J Mol Evol 13:167
Tateno Y, Nei M (1978) J Mol Evol 11:67
Zuckerkandl E, Pauling L (1965) In: Bryson V, Vogel HJ (eds) Evolving Genes and Proteins. Academic Press, New York, p 97
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nei, M., Tateno, Y. Statistical properties of the Jukes-Holmquist method of estimating the number of nucleotide substitutions: Reply to Holmquist and Conroy's criticism. J Mol Evol 17, 182–187 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01733912
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01733912