Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12144648›Full record

ReviewMolecular ecology2002

Applications of selective neutrality tests to molecular ecology.

Michael J Ford

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular ecology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing 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

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. EDEN: evolutionary dynamics within environments.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2017
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. LEC-2, a highly variable lectin in the lichenSymbiosis (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2012
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Michael J FordNorthwest Fisheries Science Center, Conservation Biology Division, 2725 Montlake Blvd E, Seattle, WA 98112, USA. mike.ford@noaa.gov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper reviews how statistical tests of neutrality have been used to address questions in molecular ecology are reviewed. The work consists of four major parts: a brief review of the current status of the neutral theory; a review of several particularly interesting examples of how statistical tests of neutrality have led to insight into ecological problems; a brief discussion of the pitfalls of assuming a strictly neutral model if it is false; and a discussion of some of the opportunities and problems that molecular ecologists face when using neutrality tests to study natural selection.

Indexed as

EcologyMolecular BiologySelection, GeneticAnimalsEvolution, MolecularHumansModels, MolecularProtein Structure, Tertiary

Identifiers

PMID12144648
PMCPMC7201874

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.