Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19995416›Full record

ArticleBiology direct2009

Depauperate genetic variability detected in the American and European bison using genomic techniques.

Cino Pertoldi, Małgorzata Tokarska, Jan M Wójcik, Ditte Demontis, Volker Loeschcke, Vivi R Gregersen, David Coltman, Gregory A Wilson, Ettore Randi, Michael M Hansen and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology direct, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. In Search of Species-Specific SNPs in a Non-Model Animal (European Bison (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

11 authors.

Cino PertoldiMammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Białowieza, Poland. biocp@nf.au.dk
Małgorzata Tokarska
Jan M Wójcik
Ditte Demontis
Volker Loeschcke
Vivi R Gregersen
David Coltman
Gregory A Wilson
Ettore Randi
Michael M Hansen
Christian Bendixen

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A total of 929 polymorphic SNPs in EB (out of 54, 000 SNPs screened using a BovineSNP50 Illumina Genotyping BeadChip), and 1, 524 and 1, 403 polymorphic SNPs in WB and PB, respectively, were analysed. EB, WB and PB have all undergone recent drastic reductions in population size. Accordingly, they exhibited extremely depauperate genomes, deviations from genetic equilibrium and a genome organization consisting of a mosaic of haplotype blocks: regions with low haplotype diversity and high levels of linkage disequilibrium. No evidence for positive or stabilizing selection was found in EB, WB and PB, likely reflecting drift overwhelming selection. We suggest that utilization of genome-wide screening technologies, followed by utilization of less expensive techniques (e.g. VeraCode and Fluidigm EP1), holds large potential for genetic monitoring of populations. Additionally, these techniques will allow radical improvements of breeding practices in captive or managed populations, otherwise hampered by the limited availability of polymorphic markers. This result in improved possibilities for 1) estimating genetic relationships among individuals and 2) designing breeding strategies which attempt to preserve or reduce polymorphism in ecologically relevant genes and/or entire blocks.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationAmericasAnimalsBisonEuropeGenomicsHaplotypesPolymorphism, Single Nucleotide

Identifiers

PMID19995416
PMCPMC2793249

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.