Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11901132›Full record

ArticleGenetics2002

The signature of positive selection at randomly chosen loci.

Molly Przeworski

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 256 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
256citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

256 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Towards an evolutionary baseline model ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Accessible, realistic genome simulation with selection using stdpopsim.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Digital Image Processing to Detect Adaptive Evolution.Molecular biology and evolution · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

196 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

  • Erratum issued
  • Erratum issued
5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Molly PrzeworskiDepartment of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3TG, United Kingdom. przewors@eva.mpg.de

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In Drosophila and humans, there are accumulating examples of loci with a significant excess of high-frequency-derived alleles or high levels of linkage disequilibrium, relative to a neutral model of a random-mating population of constant size. These are features expected after a recent selective sweep. Their prevalence suggests that positive directional selection may be widespread in both species. However, as I show here, these features do not persist long after the sweep ends: The high-frequency alleles drift to fixation and no longer contribute to polymorphism, while linkage disequilibrium is broken down by recombination. As a result, loci chosen without independent evidence of recent selection are not expected to exhibit either of these features, even if they have been affected by numerous sweeps in their genealogical history. How then can we explain the patterns in the data? One possibility is population structure, with unequal sampling from different subpopulations. Alternatively, positive selection may not operate as is commonly modeled. In particular, the rate of fixation of advantageous mutations may have increased in the recent past.

Indexed as

Linkage DisequilibriumModels, GeneticSelection, GeneticAdaptation, BiologicalAnimalsDrosophilaHumans

Identifiers

PMID11901132
PMCPMC1462030

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.