Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27913840›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2017

Finding Direction in the Search for Selection.

Grant Thiltgen, Mario Dos Reis, Richard A Goldstein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The genetic foundations of convergent traits.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Describing and characterizing theFrontiers in plant science · 2024
    Review
  5. Evaluating the Potential Fitness Effects of Chinook Salmon (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Grant ThiltgenInstitute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
Mario Dos ReisThe School of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Richard A GoldsteinDivision of Infection & Immunity, University College London, London, UK. r.goldstein@ucl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5148-4672

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/P007562/1Medical Research Council MC_PC_13056Medical Research Council MC_U117573805
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Tests for positive selection have mostly been developed to look for diversifying selection where change away from the current amino acid is often favorable. However, in many cases we are interested in directional selection where there is a shift toward specific amino acids, resulting in increased fitness in the species. Recently, a few methods have been developed to detect and characterize directional selection on a molecular level. Using the results of evolutionary simulations as well as HIV drug resistance data as models of directional selection, we compare two such methods with each other, as well as against a standard method for detecting diversifying selection. We find that the method to detect diversifying selection also detects directional selection under certain conditions. One method developed for detecting directional selection is powerful and accurate for a wide range of conditions, while the other can generate an excessive number of false positives.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionComputer SimulationDrug Resistance, ViralEvolution, MolecularGenetic VariationModels, GeneticPhylogenySelection, GeneticSequence Analysis, ProteinDirectional selectionDiversifying selectiond N/d SPositive selection

Identifiers

PMID27913840
PMCPMC5253163

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.