Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18663587›Full record

ReviewGenetica2009

Analysis and implications of mutational variation.

Peter D Keightley, Daniel L Halligan

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Genetica, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. An additional proofreader contributes to DNA replication fidelity in mycobacteria.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Causes of natural variation in fitness: evidence from studies of Drosophila populations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Rate and molecular spectrum of spontaneous mutations in the bacterium Escherichia coli as determined by whole-genome sequencing.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2012
    Article
  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

2 authors.

Peter D KeightleyInstitute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, West Mains Road, Edinburgh, EH9 3JT, UK. pk.genetica2008@gmail.com
Daniel L Halligan

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/D015480/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Variation from new mutations is important for several questions in quantitative genetics. Key parameters are the genomic mutation rate and the distribution of effects of mutations (DEM), which determine the amount of new quantitative variation that arises per generation from mutation (V(M)). Here, we review methods and empirical results concerning mutation accumulation (MA) experiments that have shed light on properties of mutations affecting quantitative traits. Surprisingly, most data on fitness traits from laboratory assays of MA lines indicate that the DEM is platykurtic in form (i.e., substantially less leptokurtic than an exponential distribution), and imply that most variation is produced by mutations of moderate to large effect. This finding contrasts with results from MA or mutagenesis experiments in which mutational changes to the DNA can be assayed directly, which imply that the vast majority of mutations have very small phenotypic effects, and that the distribution has a leptokurtic form. We compare these findings with recent approaches that attempt to infer the DEM for fitness based on comparing the frequency spectra of segregating nucleotide polymorphisms at putatively neutral and selected sites in population samples. When applied to data for humans and Drosophila, these analyses also indicate that the DEM is strongly leptokurtic. However, by combining the resultant estimates of parameters of the DEM with estimates of the mutation rate per nucleotide, the predicted V(M) for fitness is only a tiny fraction of V(M) observed in MA experiments. This discrepancy can be explained if we postulate that a few deleterious mutations of large effect contribute most of the mutational variation observed in MA experiments and that such mutations segregate at very low frequencies in natural populations, and effectively are never seen in population samples.

Indexed as

MutationAnimalsDNA Mutational AnalysisGenomicsHumansNucleotidesPolymorphism, GeneticNucleotides

Identifiers

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.