Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23754436›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2013

Random fluctuation of selection coefficients and the extent of nucleotide variation in human populations.

Sayaka Miura, Zhenguo Zhang, Masatoshi Nei

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

3 authors.

Sayaka MiuraInstitute of Molecular Evolutionary Genetics and Department of Biology, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Zhenguo Zhang
Masatoshi Nei

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It is well known that the selection coefficient of a mutant allele varies from generation to generation, and the effect of this factor on genetic variation has been studied by many theoreticians. However, no consensus has been reached. One group of investigators believes that fluctuating selection has an effect of enhancing genetic variation, whereas the other group contends that it has a diversity-reducing effect. In recent years, it has become possible to study this problem by using single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) as well as exome sequence data. In this article we present the theoretical distributions of mutant nucleotide frequencies for the two models of fluctuating selection and then compare the distributions with the empirical distributions obtained from SNP and exome sequence data in human populations. Interestingly, both SNP and exome sequence data showed that the neutral mutation model fits the empirical distribution quite well. Furthermore, the mathematical models with diversity-enhancing and diversity-reducing effects also fit the empirical distribution reasonably well. This result implies that there is no need of distinguishing between the diversity-enhancing and diversity-reducing models of fluctuating selection and the nucleotide polymorphism in human populations can be explained largely by neutral mutations when long-term evolution is considered.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationModels, GeneticPolymorphism, Single NucleotideSelection, GeneticBiostatisticsDatabases, Nucleic AcidEvolution, MolecularExomeGene FrequencyGenetic Carrier ScreeningGenome, HumanHumansMutationallele frequency distributionfluctuating selection coefficientheterozygosity

Identifiers

PMID23754436
PMCPMC3696816

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.