Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23152720›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2012

Recombination modulates how selection affects linked sites in Drosophila.

Suzanne E McGaugh, Caiti S S Heil, Brenda Manzano-Winkler, Laurence Loewe, Steve Goldstein, Tiffany L Himmel, Mohamed A F Noor

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed
8.7field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Population genomics ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. The recombination landscape of introgression in yeast.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Effects of marker type and filtering criteria onRoyal Society open science · 2019
    Article
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Suzanne E McGaughBiology Department, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America. suzanne.mcgaugh@duke.edu
Caiti S S Heil
Brenda Manzano-Winkler
Laurence Loewe
Steve Goldstein
Tiffany L Himmel
Mohamed A F Noor
Duke University · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · USWisconsin Institutes for Discovery · US

Funding

Fine-scale recombination rate variation within and between Drosophila speciesRC2GM092501 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF IOWA · PI COMERON, JOSEP M, JONES, CORBIN D · 2009 to 2010
$1.8M
Fine-scale recombination, variation, divergence, and codon bias in DrosophilaR01GM086445 · NIGMS · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI KLIMAN, RICHARD M, NOOR, MOHAMED A · 2009 to 2012
$1.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM086445NIGMS NIH HHS GM092501NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM086445NIGMS NIH HHS RC2 GM092501
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the most influential observations in molecular evolution has been a strong association between local recombination rate and nucleotide polymorphisms across the genome. This is interpreted as evidence for ubiquitous natural selection. The alternative explanation, that recombination is mutagenic, has been rejected by the absence of a similar association between local recombination rate and nucleotide divergence between species. However, many recent studies show that recombination rates are often very different even in closely related species, questioning whether an association between recombination rate and divergence between species has been tested satisfactorily. To circumvent this problem, we directly surveyed recombination across approximately 43% of the D. pseudoobscura physical genome in two separate recombination maps and 31% of the D. miranda physical genome, and we identified both global and local differences in recombination rate between these two closely related species. Using only regions with conserved recombination rates between and within species and accounting for multiple covariates, our data support the conclusion that recombination is positively related to diversity because recombination modulates Hill-Robertson effects in the genome and not because recombination is predominately mutagenic. Finally, we find evidence for dips in diversity around nonsynonymous substitutions. We infer that at least some of this reduction in diversity resulted from selective sweeps and examine these dips in the context of recombination rate.

Indexed as

Genetic LinkageGenome, InsectRecombination, GeneticSelection, GeneticAnimalsBase SequenceChromosome MappingChromosomes, InsectCodonConfidence IntervalsConserved SequenceDrosophilaEvolution, MolecularGenetics, PopulationGenetic VariationLinear ModelsCodon

Identifiers

PMID23152720
PMCPMC3496668
OpenAlexW2095434945

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.