ArticleInvestigative genetics2015
Inferring positive selection in humans from genomic data.
Article in Investigative genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-term artificial selection of Hanwoo (Korean) cattle left genetic signatures for the breeding traits and has altered the genomic structure.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A Faster and More Accurate Algorithm for Calculating Population Genetics Statistics Requiring Sums of Stirling Numbers of the First Kind.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020Article
- Genetic Variation in Human Gene Regulatory Factors Uncovers Regulatory Roles in Local Adaptation and Disease.Genome biology and evolution · 2019Article
- Selection on the regulation of sympathetic nervous activity in humans and chimpanzees.PLoS genetics · 2018Article
- A Gene-Based Positive Selection Detection Approach to Identify Vaccine Candidates UsingFrontiers in genetics · 2018Article
- Detecting gene subnetworks under selection in biological pathways.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- Genetic loci associated with coronary artery disease harbor evidence of selection and antagonistic pleiotropy.PLoS genetics · 2017Article
- S/HIC: Robust Identification of Soft and Hard Sweeps Using Machine Learning.PLoS genetics · 2016Article
- Article
- Heterozygosity increases microsatellite mutation rate.Biology letters · 2016Article
- Population genetic studies in the genomic sequencing era.Dong wu xue yan jiu = Zoological research · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Adaptation can be described as an evolutionary process that leads to an adjustment of the phenotypes of a population to their environment. In the classical view, new mutations can introduce novel phenotypic features into a population that leave footprints in the genome after fixation, such as selective sweeps. Alternatively, existing genetic variants may become beneficial after an environmental change and increase in frequency. Although they may not reach fixation, they may cause a shift of the optimum of a phenotypic trait controlled by multiple loci. With the availability of polymorphism data from various organisms, including humans and chimpanzees, it has become possible to detect molecular evidence of adaptation and to estimate the strength and target of positive selection. In this review, we discuss the two competing models of adaptation and suitable approaches for detecting the footprints of positive selection on the molecular level.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.