ArticleJournal of genetics2013
Fast evolutionary genetic differentiation during experimental colonizations.
Article in Journal of genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analyses of locomotion, wing morphology, and microbiome in Drosophila nigrosparsa after recovery from antibiotics.MicrobiologyOpen · 2022Article
- Article
- Identifying consistent allele frequency differences in studies of stratified populations.Methods in ecology and evolution · 2017Article
- History, chance and selection during phenotypic and genomic experimental evolution: replaying the tape of life at different levels.Frontiers in genetics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Founder effects during colonization of a novel environment are expected to change the genetic composition of populations, leading to differentiation between the colonizer population and its source population. Another expected outcome is differentiation among populations derived from repeated independent colonizations starting from the same source. We have previously detected significant founder effects affecting rate of laboratory adaptation among Drosophila subobscura laboratory populations derived from the wild. We also showed that during the first generations in the laboratory, considerable genetic differentiation occurs between foundations. The present study deepens that analysis, taking into account the natural sampling hierarchy of six foundations, derived from different locations, different years and from two samples in one of the years. We show that striking stochastic effects occur in the first two generations of laboratory culture, effects that produce immediate differentiation between foundations, independent of the source of origin and despite similarity among all founders. This divergence is probably due to powerful genetic sampling effects during the first few generations of culture in the novel laboratory environment, as a result of a significant drop in Ne. Changes in demography as well as high variance in reproductive success in the novel environment may contribute to the low values of Ne. This study shows that estimates of genetic differentiation between natural populations may be accurate when based on the initial samples collected in the wild, though considerable genetic differentiation may occur in the very first generations of evolution in a new, confined environment. Rapid and significant evolutionary changes can thus occur during the early generations of a founding event, both in the wild and under domestication, effects of interest for both scientific and conservation purposes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23970074What 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.