Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24828461›Full record

ArticleNature communications2014

Epistasis and natural selection shape the mutational architecture of complex traits.

Adam G Jones, Reinhard Bürger, Stevan J Arnold

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature communications, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 148 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Persistent selection on size explains micro- and macroevolutionary alignments in fly wings.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Evolution of developmental bias explains divergent patterns of phenotypic evolution in two nematode clades.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Longitudinal sequencing reveals polygenic and epistatic nature of genomic response to selection.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Developmental bias predicts 60 million years of wing shape evolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  18. Variation in mutational (co)variances.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023
    Article
  19. Evolvability and trait function predict phenotypic divergence of plant populations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Adam G JonesDepartment of Biology, Texas A&M University, 3258 TAMU, College Station, Texas 77843, USA.
Reinhard BürgerInstitut für Mathematik, Universität Wien, Wien 1090, Austria.
Stevan J ArnoldDepartment of Integrative Biology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon 97331, USA.
Oregon State University · USTexas A&M University · USUniversity of Vienna · AT

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF P 21305Austrian Science Fund FWF P 25188
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evolutionary trajectories of complex traits are constrained by levels of genetic variation as well as genetic correlations among traits. As the ultimate source of all genetic variation is mutation, the distribution of mutations entering populations profoundly affects standing variation and genetic correlations. Here we use an individual-based simulation model to investigate how natural selection and gene interactions (that is, epistasis) shape the evolution of mutational processes affecting complex traits. We find that the presence of epistasis allows natural selection to mould the distribution of mutations, such that mutational effects align with the selection surface. Consequently, novel mutations tend to be more compatible with the current forces of selection acting on the population. These results suggest that in many cases mutational effects should be seen as an outcome of natural selection rather than as an unbiased source of genetic variation that is independent of other evolutionary processes.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationEpistasis, GeneticModels, GeneticMultifactorial InheritanceMutationSelection, GeneticEvolution, MolecularGenetic VariationGenotypeHumansPhenotype

Identifiers

PMID24828461
PMCPMC4024485
OpenAlexW2005977247

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.