Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27025270›Full record

ReviewGenetics, selection, evolution : GSE2016

A decade of pig genome sequencing: a window on pig domestication and evolution.

Martien A M Groenen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genetics, selection, evolution : GSE, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 78 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
78citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Pig Genome Editing for Agriculture: Achievements and Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Archaeogenomic insights into commensalism and regional variation in pig management in Neolithic northwest Europe.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

18 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

1 author.

Martien A M GroenenAnimal Breeding and Genomics Centre, Wageningen University, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB, Wageningen, The Netherlands. martien.groenen@wur.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0484-4545

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Insight into how genomes change and adapt due to selection addresses key questions in evolutionary biology and in domestication of animals and plants by humans. In that regard, the pig and its close relatives found in Africa and Eurasia represent an excellent group of species that enables studies of the effect of both natural and human-mediated selection on the genome. The recent completion of the draft genome sequence of a domestic pig and the development of next-generation sequencing technology during the past decade have created unprecedented possibilities to address these questions in great detail. In this paper, I review recent whole-genome sequencing studies in the pig and closely-related species that provide insight into the demography, admixture and selection of these species and, in particular, how domestication and subsequent selection of Sus scrofa have shaped the genomes of these animals.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionMolecular Sequence DataAnimalsAsiaChromosome MappingEuropeGenomeGenomicsModels, AnimalPhylogenyPopulation DynamicsSelection, GeneticSus scrofa

Identifiers

PMID27025270
PMCPMC4812630

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.