Skip to main content

Table 1 Summary information for species studied, including species names, number of sampled individuals and loci, as well as log marginal likelihood for each demographic model. Best fitting models with log Bayes factor generally larger than 3 against others are highlighted in bold

From: Ice age unfrozen: severe effect of the last interglacial, not glacial, climate change on East Asian avifauna

Species

No. Indsa

No. Locb

Output of LAMARC analyses

Output of BEAST analysesd

Constant size

Exponential growth

Logistic growth

Expansion growth

Bayesian Skygrid

g (95%CI)c

Aegithalos concinnus

29

25 (25)

873.09 (623.44, 919.20)

−18,381.02/

−18,387.41

−18,337.58/

−18,345.80

−18,335.44/

−18,342.76

−18,337.65/

−18,344.41

−18,328.25/

−18,337.20

Alcippe morrisonia

31

26 (26)

445.00 (213.07, 808.07)

−21,925.05.24/

−21,761.34

−21,321.76/

−21,334.32

−21,310.73/

−21,321.83

−21,329.74/

−21,340.07

−21,319.53/

−21,330.55

Cettia fortipes

28

26 (25)

864.57 (657.38, 914.89)

−20,866.90/

−20,871.83

−20,816.09/

−20,822.49

−20,810.44/

−20,817.28

−20,813.41/

−20,821.15

−20,818.79/

−20,825.96

Fulvetta ruficapilla

17

27 (25)

254.87 (−288.12, 835.27)

−23,164.78/

−23,166.04

−23,157.21/

−23,159.99

−23,158.79/

−23,160.72

−23,154.82/

−23,156.59

−23,165.93/

−23,167.89

Leiothrix lutea

26

27 (25)

889.45 (721.87, 930.99)

−19,430.79/

−19,436.22

−19,371.60/

−19,379.16

−19,366.81/

−19,374.85

−19,373.72/

−19,381.19

−19,371.27/

−19,378.37

Lioparus chrysotis

25

26 (26)

691.00 (119.92, 867.68)

−22,793.63/

−22,796.47

−22,789.32/

−22,792.89

−22,777.02/

−22,781.68

−22,781.52/

−22,786.17

−22,558.18/

−22,559.17

Parus monticolus

19

28 (26)

839.81 (−24.42, 896.38)

−22,914.29/

−22,916.07

−22,902.45/

−22,905.75

−22,899.97/

−22,902.93

−22,903.01/

−22,905.79

−22,906.41/

−22,910.13

Pomatorhinus ruficollis

34

27 (25)

586.95 (293.02, 854.46)

−19,062.06/

−19,070.21

−19,037.46/

−19,050.57

−19,030.12/

−19,042.18

−19,033.39/

−19,044.01

−19,024.95/

−19,037.02

Spizixos semitorques e

26

26 (26)

835.62 (259.03, 881.86)

−19,240.68/

−19,242.86

−19,222.16/

−19,224.94

−19,221.68/

−19,223.76

−19,228.76/

−19,231.84

−19,229.73/

−19,233.30

Stachyridopsis ruficeps

31

31 (30)

842.18 (431.79, 890.58)

−25,752.35/

−25,763.90

−25,716.61/

−25,729.62

−25,707.27/

−25,722.91

−25,701.14/

−25,715.47

−25,718.02/

−25,734.83

Yuhina diademata

32

25 (25)

749.45 (240.43, 880.94)

−24,669.52/

−24,677.78

−24,653.90/

−24,662.24

−24,643.13/

−24,654.81

−24,654.13/

−24,664.42

−24,657.12/

−24,665.48

  1. anumber of individuals sampled for each species
  2. bnumber of loci sampled for each species with that finally used in brackets
  3. cthe most probable estimates of population growth rate for each species with 95% credibility intervals (CI) in brackets
  4. dlog marginal likelihood estimates for different species and coalescent models, estimated using path sampling and step-stone procedures
  5. ethis species has two equivalently best-fitted and general similar models, and the model with smallest log marginal likelihood (e.g., logistic growth) was shown in Fig. 2