Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16683038›Full record

ReviewPLoS genetics2006

Balancing selection and its effects on sequences in nearby genome regions.

Deborah Charlesworth

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS genetics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 359 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
359citing 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

359 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Population Genetic Study ofEcology and evolution · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. A century of theories of balancing selection.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

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.

Deborah CharlesworthInstitute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. Deborah.Charlesworth@ed.ac.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Our understanding of balancing selection is currently becoming greatly clarified by new sequence data being gathered from genes in which polymorphisms are known to be maintained by selection. The data can be interpreted in conjunction with results from population genetics models that include recombination between selected sites and nearby neutral marker variants. This understanding is making possible tests for balancing selection using molecular evolutionary approaches. Such tests do not necessarily require knowledge of the functional types of the different alleles at a locus, but such information, as well as information about the geographic distribution of alleles and markers near the genes, can potentially help towards understanding what form of balancing selection is acting, and how long alleles have been maintained.

Indexed as

GenomePolymorphism, GeneticSelection, GeneticAnimalsBase SequenceChromosome MappingEvolution, MolecularFemaleGene FrequencyGenetic VariationTime

Identifiers

PMID16683038
PMCPMC1449905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.