Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25204303›Full record

ArticleHeredity2015

Genome data from a sixteenth century pig illuminate modern breed relationships.

O Ramírez, W Burgos-Paz, E Casas, M Ballester, E Bianco, I Olalde, G Santpere, V Novella, M Gut, C Lalueza-Fox and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heredity, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Archaeogenomic insights into commensalism and regional variation in pig management in Neolithic northwest Europe.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Imputation of Ancient Whole GenomeFrontiers in genetics · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

O RamírezInstitut de Biologia Evolutiva (CSIC-Universitat Pompeu Fabra), PRBB, Barcelona, Spain.
W Burgos-Paz1] Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, Bellaterra, Spain [2] Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
E CasasCentre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, Bellaterra, Spain.
M Ballester1] Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, Bellaterra, Spain [2] Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
E Bianco1] Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, Bellaterra, Spain [2] Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
I OlaldeInstitut de Biologia Evolutiva (CSIC-Universitat Pompeu Fabra), PRBB, Barcelona, Spain.
G SantpereInstitut de Biologia Evolutiva (CSIC-Universitat Pompeu Fabra), PRBB, Barcelona, Spain.
V NovellaDepartament de Prehistòria, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
M GutCentro Nacional de Análisis Genómico (CNAG), PCB, Barcelona, Spain.
C Lalueza-FoxInstitut de Biologia Evolutiva (CSIC-Universitat Pompeu Fabra), PRBB, Barcelona, Spain.
M SañaDepartament de Prehistòria, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain.
M Pérez-Enciso1] Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, Bellaterra, Spain [2] Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain [3] Institut Català de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA), Carrer de Lluís Companys 23, Barcelona, Spain.
Center for Research in Agricultural Genomics · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESInstitut de Biologia Evolutiva · ESPompeu Fabra University · ESCentro Nacional de Análisis Genómico · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ancient DNA (aDNA) provides direct evidence of historical events that have modeled the genome of modern individuals. In livestock, resolving the differences between the effects of initial domestication and of subsequent modern breeding is not straight forward without aDNA data. Here, we have obtained shotgun genome sequence data from a sixteenth century pig from Northeastern Spain (Montsoriu castle), the ancient pig was obtained from an extremely well-preserved and diverse assemblage. In addition, we provide the sequence of three new modern genomes from an Iberian pig, Spanish wild boar and a Guatemalan Creole pig. Comparison with both mitochondrial and autosomal genome data shows that the ancient pig is closely related to extant Iberian pigs and to European wild boar. Although the ancient sample was clearly domestic, admixture with wild boar also occurred, according to the D-statistics. The close relationship between Iberian, European wild boar and the ancient pig confirms that Asian introgression in modern Iberian pigs has not existed or has been negligible. In contrast, the Guatemalan Creole pig clusters apart from the Iberian pig genome, likely due to introgression from international breeds.

Indexed as

BreedingGenomeAllelesAnimalsDNA, MitochondrialFemaleGenetics, PopulationGenotypeMalePhylogeographyPolymorphism, Single NucleotidePrincipal Component AnalysisSequence AlignmentSequence Analysis, DNASpainSus scrofaDNA, Mitochondrial

Identifiers

PMID25204303
PMCPMC4815627
OpenAlexW2068381210

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.