Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16415358›Full record

ArticleGenetics2006

Detecting adaptive trait introgression between Iris fulva and I. brevicaulis in highly selective field conditions.

Noland H Martin, Amy C Bouck, Michael L Arnold

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Niche Conservatism for Ecological Preference in the Louisiana iris species complex.Biological journal of the Linnean Society. Linnean Society of London · 2017
    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

3 authors.

Noland H MartinDepartment of Genetics, University of Georgia, Athens 30602, USA. nhmartin@uga.edu
Amy C Bouck
Michael L Arnold

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The idea that natural hybridization has served as an important force in evolutionary and adaptive diversification has gained considerable momentum in recent years. By combining genome analyses with a highly selective field experiment, we provide evidence for adaptive trait introgression between two naturally hybridizing Louisiana Iris species, flood-tolerant Iris fulva and dry-adapted I. brevicaulis. We planted reciprocal backcross (BC1) hybrids along with pure-species plants into natural settings that, due to a flooding event, favored I. fulva. As expected, I. fulva plants survived at much higher rates than I. brevicaulis plants. Backcross hybrids toward I. fulva (BCIF) also survived at significantly higher rates than the reciprocal backcross toward I. brevicaulis (BCIB). Survivorship of BCIB hybrids was strongly influenced by the presence of a number of introgressed I. fulva alleles located throughout the genome, while survivorship in the reciprocal BCIF hybrids was heavily influenced by two epistatically acting QTL of opposite effects. These results demonstrate the potential for adaptive trait introgression between these two species and may help to explain patterns of genetic variation observed in naturally occurring hybrid zones.

Indexed as

ChimeraCrosses, GeneticEnvironmentEpistasis, GeneticEvolution, MolecularGenes, PlantGenetic LinkageGenetic SpeciationGenetic VariationGenome, PlantIris PlantModels, GeneticQuantitative Trait LociSpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID16415358
PMCPMC1456367

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.