Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25585923›Full record

ArticleHeredity2015

Quantifying realized inbreeding in wild and captive animal populations.

U Knief, G Hemmrich-Stanisak, M Wittig, A Franke, S C Griffith, B Kempenaers, W Forstmeier

Open access · bronzeAbstract 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 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

U KniefDepartment of Behavioural Ecology and Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, Seewiesen, Germany.
G Hemmrich-StanisakInstitute of Clinical Molecular Biology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
M WittigInstitute of Clinical Molecular Biology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
A FrankeInstitute of Clinical Molecular Biology, Christian-Albrechts-University, Kiel, Germany.
S C Griffith1] Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia [2] School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
B KempenaersDepartment of Behavioural Ecology and Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, Seewiesen, Germany.
W ForstmeierDepartment of Behavioural Ecology and Evolutionary Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Ornithology, Seewiesen, Germany.
Max Planck Institute for Ornithology · DEMacquarie University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most molecular measures of inbreeding do not measure inbreeding at the scale that is most relevant for understanding inbreeding depression-namely the proportion of the genome that is identical-by-descent (IBD). The inbreeding coefficient FPed obtained from pedigrees is a valuable estimator of IBD, but pedigrees are not always available, and cannot capture inbreeding loops that reach back in time further than the pedigree. We here propose a molecular approach to quantify the realized proportion of the genome that is IBD (propIBD), and we apply this method to a wild and a captive population of zebra finches (Taeniopygia guttata). In each of 948 wild and 1057 captive individuals we analyzed available single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data (260 SNPs) spread over four different genomic regions in each population. This allowed us to determine whether any of these four regions was completely homozygous within an individual, which indicates IBD with high confidence. In the highly nomadic wild population, we did not find a single case of IBD, implying that inbreeding must be extremely rare (propIBD=0-0.00094, 95% CI). In the captive population, a five-generation pedigree strongly underestimated the average amount of realized inbreeding (FPed=0.013<propIBD=0.064), as expected given that pedigree founders were already related. We suggest that this SNP-based technique is generally useful for quantifying inbreeding at the individual or population level, and we show analytically that it can capture inbreeding loops that reach back up to a few hundred generations.

Indexed as

Genetics, PopulationInbreedingModels, GeneticAnimalsFemaleFinchesGenotypeHaplotypesMalePedigreePolymorphism, Single NucleotideSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID25585923
PMCPMC4359978
OpenAlexW2034152653

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.