Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21036923›Full record

ArticleGenome research2010

Selective sweeps and parallel mutation in the adaptive recovery from deleterious mutation in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Dee R Denver, Dana K Howe, Larry J Wilhelm, Catherine A Palmer, Jennifer L Anderson, Kevin C Stein, Patrick C Phillips, Suzanne Estes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Mendelian-mutationism: the forgotten evolutionary synthesis.Journal of the history of biology · 2014
    Article
  16. Disease consequences of human adaptation.Applied & translational genomics · 2013
    Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

8 authors.

Dee R DenverDepartment of Zoology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331, USA. denver@cgrb.oregonstate.edu
Dana K Howe
Larry J Wilhelm
Catherine A Palmer
Jennifer L Anderson
Kevin C Stein
Patrick C Phillips
Suzanne Estes

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deleterious mutation poses a serious threat to human health and the persistence of small populations. Although adaptive recovery from deleterious mutation has been well-characterized in prokaryotes, the evolutionary mechanisms by which multicellular eukaryotes recover from deleterious mutation remain unknown. We applied high-throughput DNA sequencing to characterize genomic divergence patterns associated with the adaptive recovery from deleterious mutation using a Caenorhabditis elegans recovery-line system. The C. elegans recovery lines were initiated from a low-fitness mutation-accumulation (MA) line progenitor and allowed to independently evolve in large populations (N ∼ 1000) for 60 generations. All lines rapidly regained levels of fitness similar to the wild-type (N2) MA line progenitor. Although there was a near-zero probability of a single mutation fixing due to genetic drift during the recovery experiment, we observed 28 fixed mutations. Cross-generational analysis showed that all mutations went from undetectable population-level frequencies to a fixed state in 10-20 generations. Many recovery-line mutations fixed at identical timepoints, suggesting that the mutations, if not beneficial, hitchhiked to fixation during selective sweep events observed in the recovery lines. No MA line mutation reversions were detected. Parallel mutation fixation was observed for two sites in two independent recovery lines. Analysis using a C. elegans interactome map revealed many predicted interactions between genes with recovery line-specific mutations and genes with previously accumulated MA line mutations. Our study suggests that recovery-line mutations identified in both coding and noncoding genomic regions might have beneficial effects associated with compensatory epistatic interactions.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularSelection, GeneticAdaptation, BiologicalAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansEpistasis, GeneticGenetics, PopulationMutationSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID21036923
PMCPMC2989992

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.