Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26257884›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2015

Identifying signatures of sexual selection using genomewide selection components analysis.

Sarah P Flanagan, Adam G Jones

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Sarah P FlanaganBiology Department, Texas A&M University 3258 TAMU, College Station, Texas, 77843.
Adam G JonesBiology Department, Texas A&M University 3258 TAMU, College Station, Texas, 77843.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sexual selection must affect the genome for it to have an evolutionary impact, yet signatures of selection remain elusive. Here we use an individual-based model to investigate the utility of genome-wide selection components analysis, which compares allele frequencies of individuals at different life history stages within a single population to detect selection without requiring a priori knowledge of traits under selection. We modeled a diploid, sexually reproducing population and introduced strong mate choice on a quantitative trait to simulate sexual selection. Genome-wide allele frequencies in adults and offspring were compared using weighted F ST values. The average number of outlier peaks (i.e., those with significantly large F ST values) with a quantitative trait locus in close proximity ("real" peaks) represented correct diagnoses of loci under selection, whereas peaks above the F ST significance threshold without a quantitative trait locus reflected spurious peaks. We found that, even with moderate sample sizes, signatures of strong sexual selection were detectable, but larger sample sizes improved detection rates. The model was better able to detect selection with more neutral markers, and when quantitative trait loci and neutral markers were distributed across multiple chromosomes. Although environmental variation decreased detection rates, the identification of real peaks nevertheless remained feasible. We also found that detection rates can be improved by sampling multiple populations experiencing similar selection regimes. In short, genome-wide selection components analysis is a challenging but feasible approach for the identification of regions of the genome under selection.

Indexed as

Adaptationpopulation geneticspopulation genomicsRAD-seqreproductive successsimulation model

Identifiers

PMID26257884
PMCPMC4523367

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.