ArticleGenetics2008
A simple method to account for natural selection when predicting inbreeding depression.
Article in Genetics, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- CRISPR Technology for Livestock Improvement: Advances and Future Directions.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Review
- Transcriptome data analysis provides insights into the conservation of Michelia lacei, a plant species with extremely small populations distributed in Yunnan province, China.BMC plant biology · 2024Article
- Variation in the Root System Architecture of Peach × (Peach × Almond) Backcrosses.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- A Genomic Reference Panel forG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2018Article
- The impact of recent population history on the deleterious mutation load in humans and close evolutionary relatives.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2016Review
- Dominance of Deleterious Alleles Controls the Response to a Population Bottleneck.PLoS genetics · 2015Article
- Understanding and predicting the fitness decline of shrunk populations: inbreeding, purging, mutation, and standard selection.Genetics · 2012Article
- The fuel of evolution.Heredity · 2011Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has been widely appreciated that natural selection opposes the progress of inbreeding in small populations, thus limiting the actual inbreeding depression for fitness traits. However, no method to account for the consequences of this process has been given so far. I give a simple and intuitive method to predict inbreeding depression, taking into account the increase in selection efficiency against recessive alleles during inbreeding. It is based on the use of a "purged inbreeding coefficient" g(t) that accounts for the reduction of the probability of the deleterious homozygotes caused by the excess d of detrimental effect for deleterious alleles in the homozygous condition over its additive expectation. It is shown that the effect of purging can be important even for relatively small populations. For between-loci variable deleterious effects, accurate predictions can be obtained using the effective homozygous deleterious excess d(e), which can be estimated experimentally and is robust against variation of the ancestral effective population size. The method can be extended to any trait and it is used to predict the evolution of the mean viability or fecundity in a conservation program with equal or random family contributions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.