ArticleHeredity2017
Meiotic recombination shapes precision of pedigree- and marker-based estimates of inbreeding.
Article in Heredity, 2017. 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, 53 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genomes of two Extinct-in-the-Wild reptiles from Christmas Island reveal distinct evolutionary histories and conservation insights.Molecular ecology resources · 2025Article
- Article
- Little evidence of inbreeding depression for birth mass, survival and growth in Antarctic fur seal pups.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Comparative analysis of genomic inbreeding parameters and runs of homozygosity islands in several fancy and meat rabbit breeds.Animal genetics · 2022Article
- Genomic signatures of inbreeding in a critically endangered parrot, the kākāpō.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Ethiopian indigenous goats offer insights into past and recent demographic dynamics and local adaptation in sub-Saharan African goats.Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
- A comparison of pedigree, genetic and genomic estimates of relatedness for informing pairing decisions in two critically endangered birds: Implications for conservation breeding programmes worldwide.Evolutionary applications · 2020Article
- Inbreeding load and inbreeding depression estimated from lifetime reproductive success in a small, dispersal-limited population.Heredity · 2019Article
- Nonequivalent lethal equivalents: Models and inbreeding metrics for unbiased estimation of inbreeding load.Evolutionary applications · 2019Article
- Pedigree-based inbreeding coefficient explains more variation in fitness than heterozygosity at 160 microsatellites in a wild bird population.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The proportion of an individual's genome that is identical by descent (GWIBD) can be estimated from pedigrees (inbreeding coefficient 'Pedigree F') or molecular markers ('Marker F'), but both estimators come with error. Assuming unrelated pedigree founders, Pedigree F is the expected proportion of GWIBD given a specific inbreeding constellation. Meiotic recombination introduces variation around that expectation (Mendelian noise) and related pedigree founders systematically bias Pedigree F downward. Marker F is an estimate of the actual proportion of GWIBD but it suffers from the sampling error of markers plus the error that occurs when a marker is homozygous without reflecting common ancestry (identical by state). We here show via simulation of a zebra finch and a human linkage map that three aspects of meiotic recombination (independent assortment of chromosomes, number of crossovers and their distribution along chromosomes) contribute to variation in GWIBD and thus the precision of Pedigree and Marker F. In zebra finches, where the genome contains large blocks that are rarely broken up by recombination, the Mendelian noise was large (nearly twofold larger s.d. values compared with humans) and Pedigree F thus less precise than in humans, where crossovers are distributed more uniformly along chromosomes. Effects of meiotic recombination on Marker F were reversed, such that the same number of molecular markers yielded more precise estimates of GWIBD in zebra finches than in humans. As a consequence, in species inheriting large blocks that rarely recombine, even small numbers of microsatellite markers will often be more informative about inbreeding and fitness than large pedigrees.
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.