Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26355005›Full record

ArticleGenome research2015

Linked selection and recombination rate variation drive the evolution of the genomic landscape of differentiation across the speciation continuum of Ficedula flycatchers.

Reto Burri, Alexander Nater, Takeshi Kawakami, Carina F Mugal, Pall I Olason, Linnea Smeds, Alexander Suh, Ludovic Dutoit, Stanislav Bureš, Laszlo Z Garamszegi and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 177 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
177citing 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

177 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Evolution of genome-wide barriers to gene flow during complex speciation in rattlesnakes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  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. Article
  20. Article

117 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

18 authors.

Reto BurriDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Alexander NaterDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Takeshi KawakamiDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Carina F MugalDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Pall I OlasonWallenberg Advanced Bioinformatics Infrastructure (WABI), Science for Life Laboratory, Uppsala University, 75123 Uppsala, Sweden;
Linnea SmedsDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Alexander SuhDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Ludovic DutoitDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Stanislav BurešLaboratory of Ornithology, Department of Zoology, Palacky University, 77146 Olomouc, Czech Republic;
Laszlo Z GaramszegiDepartment of Evolutionary Ecology, Estación Biológica de Doñana-CSIC, 41092 Seville, Spain;
Silje HognerDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway; Natural History Museum, University of Oslo, 0318 Oslo, Norway;
Juan MorenoMuseo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales-CSIC, 28006 Madrid, Spain;
Anna QvarnströmDepartment of Animal Ecology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;
Milan RužićBird Protection and Study Society of Serbia, Radnička 20a, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia;
Stein-Are SætherDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway; Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), 7034 Trondheim, Norway;
Glenn-Peter SætreDepartment of Biosciences, Centre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, University of Oslo, 0316 Oslo, Norway;
Janos TörökBehavioural Ecology Group, Department of Systematic Zoology and Ecology, Eötvös Loránd University, 1117 Budapest, Hungary.
Hans EllegrenDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Evolutionary Biology Centre, Uppsala University, 75236 Uppsala, Sweden;

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Speciation is a continuous process during which genetic changes gradually accumulate in the genomes of diverging species. Recent studies have documented highly heterogeneous differentiation landscapes, with distinct regions of elevated differentiation ("differentiation islands") widespread across genomes. However, it remains unclear which processes drive the evolution of differentiation islands; how the differentiation landscape evolves as speciation advances; and ultimately, how differentiation islands are related to speciation. Here, we addressed these questions based on population genetic analyses of 200 resequenced genomes from 10 populations of four Ficedula flycatcher sister species. We show that a heterogeneous differentiation landscape starts emerging among populations within species, and differentiation islands evolve recurrently in the very same genomic regions among independent lineages. Contrary to expectations from models that interpret differentiation islands as genomic regions involved in reproductive isolation that are shielded from gene flow, patterns of sequence divergence (d(xy) and relative node depth) do not support a major role of gene flow in the evolution of the differentiation landscape in these species. Instead, as predicted by models of linked selection, genome-wide variation in diversity and differentiation can be explained by variation in recombination rate and the density of targets for selection. We thus conclude that the heterogeneous landscape of differentiation in Ficedula flycatchers evolves mainly as the result of background selection and selective sweeps in genomic regions of low recombination. Our results emphasize the necessity of incorporating linked selection as a null model to identify genome regions involved in adaptation and speciation.

Indexed as

Genetic SpeciationRecombination, GeneticSelection, GeneticAnimalsFemaleGene FlowGenetics, PopulationGenomeGenomicsGenotyping TechniquesMalePasseriformesPolymorphism, Single NucleotideReproductive IsolationSequence Analysis, DNASpecies Specificity

Identifiers

PMID26355005
PMCPMC4617962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.