Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25706129›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2015

Recent selective sweeps in North American Drosophila melanogaster show signatures of soft sweeps.

Nandita R Garud, Philipp W Messer, Erkan O Buzbas, Dmitri A Petrov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 302 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
302citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

302 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The persistence and loss of hard selective sweeps amid admixture in ancient Eurasians.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Selection scans and downstream analysis with selscan.Human population genetics and genomics · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

242 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors.

Nandita R GarudDepartment of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America; Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.
Philipp W MesserDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America; Department of Biological Statistics and Computational Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, United States of America.
Erkan O BuzbasDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America; Department of Statistical Science, University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, United States of America.
Dmitri A PetrovDepartment of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, California, United States of America.

Funding

INSTITUTIONAL TRAINING GRANT IN GENOME SCIENCET32HG000044 · NHGRI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MICHAEL P. SNYDER · 1995 to 2026
$32.2M
The Evolution of Protein FlexibilityP20RR016448 · NCRR · UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO · PI BROWN, CELESTE J · 2002 to 2011
$19.3M
Genomics of rapid adaptation on seasonal timescales in D. melanogasterR01GM100366 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SCHMIDT, PAUL · 2012 to 2019
$3.3M
Sequencing yeast lines to measure rates of neutral and deleterious mutationsR01GM097415 · NIGMS · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI PETROV, DMITRI, SIEGAL, MARK L · 2011 to 2014
$2.3M
Center for Research on Processes in EvolutionP20GM103397 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO · PI FORNEY, LARRY J · 2012 to 2012
$1.9M
Population-Genetic Studies for Association MappingR01GM081441 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI ROSENBERG, NOAH · 2007 to 2011
$1.7M
Population Genomics of Adaptive Transposition in DrosophilaR01GM089926 · NIGMS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI PETROV, DMITRI · 2010 to 2013
$969k
NCRR NIH HHS 5P20RR016448-10NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR016448NHGRI NIH HHS T32 HG000044NIGMS NIH HHS 8 P20 GM103397-10NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103397NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM081441NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM089926NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM097415NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM100366NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM100366
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Adaptation from standing genetic variation or recurrent de novo mutation in large populations should commonly generate soft rather than hard selective sweeps. In contrast to a hard selective sweep, in which a single adaptive haplotype rises to high population frequency, in a soft selective sweep multiple adaptive haplotypes sweep through the population simultaneously, producing distinct patterns of genetic variation in the vicinity of the adaptive site. Current statistical methods were expressly designed to detect hard sweeps and most lack power to detect soft sweeps. This is particularly unfortunate for the study of adaptation in species such as Drosophila melanogaster, where all three confirmed cases of recent adaptation resulted in soft selective sweeps and where there is evidence that the effective population size relevant for recent and strong adaptation is large enough to generate soft sweeps even when adaptation requires mutation at a specific single site at a locus. Here, we develop a statistical test based on a measure of haplotype homozygosity (H12) that is capable of detecting both hard and soft sweeps with similar power. We use H12 to identify multiple genomic regions that have undergone recent and strong adaptation in a large population sample of fully sequenced Drosophila melanogaster strains from the Drosophila Genetic Reference Panel (DGRP). Visual inspection of the top 50 candidates reveals that in all cases multiple haplotypes are present at high frequencies, consistent with signatures of soft sweeps. We further develop a second haplotype homozygosity statistic (H2/H1) that, in combination with H12, is capable of differentiating hard from soft sweeps. Surprisingly, we find that the H12 and H2/H1 values for all top 50 peaks are much more easily generated by soft rather than hard sweeps. We discuss the implications of these results for the study of adaptation in Drosophila and in species with large census population sizes.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularAdaptation, PhysiologicalAllelesAnimalsDrosophila melanogasterGene FrequencyGenetics, PopulationGenome, InsectHaplotypesPopulation DensitySelection, GeneticUnited States

Identifiers

PMID25706129
PMCPMC4338236

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.