Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17660574›Full record

ArticleGenetics2007

A selective sweep in the chloroplast DNA of dioecious silene (section Elisanthe).

Graham Muir, Dmitry Filatov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

2 authors.

Graham MuirSchool of Biosciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, United Kingdom.
Dmitry Filatov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene flow occurs predominantly via pollen in angiosperms, leading to stronger population subdivision for maternally inherited markers, relative to paternally or biparentally inherited genes. In contrast to this trend, population subdivision within Silene latifolia and S. dioica, as well as subdivision between the two species, is substantially lower in maternally inherited chloroplast genes compared to paternally inherited Y-linked genes. A significant frequency spectrum bias toward rare polymorphisms and a significant loss of polymorphism in chloroplast genes compared to Y-linked and autosomal genes suggest that intra- and inter-specific subdivision in the chloroplast DNA may have been eroded by a selective sweep that has crossed the S. latifolia and S. dioica species boundary.

Indexed as

Genes, PlantGenetics, PopulationBase SequenceDNA, ChloroplastGenes, Y-LinkedMolecular Sequence DataPolymorphism, GeneticSileneSpecies SpecificityDNA, Chloroplast

Identifiers

PMID17660574
PMCPMC2034629

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.