ArticleGenetics2016
Signatures of Dobzhansky-Muller Incompatibilities in the Genomes of Recombinant Inbred Lines.
Article in Genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- How population subsampling to concentrate selection effects can help to find epistatic interactions of transmission ratio distortion.Heredity · 2026Article
- Postzygotic barriers persist despite ongoing introgression in hybridizing Mimulus species.Molecular ecology · 2024Article
- AlphaBeta: computational inference of epimutation rates and spectra from high-throughput DNA methylation data in plants.Genome biology · 2020Article
- In search of the Goldilocks zone for hybrid speciation.PLoS genetics · 2018Article
- The Genetic Architecture of Intra-Species Hybrid Mito-Nuclear Epistasis.Frontiers in genetics · 2018Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the construction of recombinant inbred lines (RILs) from two divergent inbred parents certain genotype (or epigenotype) combinations may be functionally "incompatible" when brought together in the genomes of the progeny, thus resulting in sterility or lower fertility. Natural selection against these epistatic combinations during inbreeding can change haplotype frequencies and distort linkage disequilibrium (LD) relations between loci on the same or on different chromosomes. These LD distortions have received increased experimental attention, because they point to genomic regions that may drive a Dobzhansky-Muller type of reproductive isolation and, ultimately, speciation in the wild. Here we study the selection signatures of two-locus epistatic incompatibility models and quantify their impact on the genetic composition of the genomes of two-way RILs obtained by selfing. We also consider the biases introduced by breeders when trying to counteract the loss of lines by selectively propagating only viable seeds. Building on our theoretical results, we develop model-based maximum-likelihood (ML) tests that can be applied to multilocus RIL genotype data to infer the precise mode of incompatibility as well as the relative fitness of incompatible loci. We illustrate this ML approach in the context of two published Arabidopsis thaliana RIL panels. Our work lays the theoretical foundation for studying more complex systems such as RILs obtained by sibling mating and/or from multiparental crosses.
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.