Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28035257›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2016

The challenge of separating signatures of local adaptation from those of isolation by distance and colonization history: The case of two white pines.

Simon Nadeau, Patrick G Meirmans, Sally N Aitken, Kermit Ritland, Nathalie Isabel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing 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

34 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

Simon NadeauNatural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Laurentian Forestry Centre Québec QC Canada; Department of Forest and Conservation Sciences The University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3519-4998
Patrick G MeirmansInstitute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics University of Amsterdam Amsterdam The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-6395-8107
Sally N AitkenDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences The University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada.
Kermit RitlandDepartment of Forest and Conservation Sciences The University of British Columbia Vancouver BC Canada.
Nathalie IsabelNatural Resources Canada Canadian Forest Service Laurentian Forestry Centre Québec QC Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurately detecting signatures of local adaptation using genetic-environment associations (GEAs) requires controlling for neutral patterns of population structure to reduce the risk of false positives. However, a high degree of collinearity between climatic gradients and neutral population structure can greatly reduce power, and the performance of GEA methods in such case is rarely evaluated in empirical studies. In this study, we attempted to disentangle the effects of local adaptation and isolation by environment (IBE) from those of isolation by distance (IBD) and isolation by colonization from glacial refugia (IBC) using range-wide samples in two white pine species. For this, SNPs from 168 genes, including 52 candidate genes for growth and phenology, were genotyped in 133 and 61 populations of

Indexed as

genetic‐environment associationsisolation by colonizationisolation by environmentlandscape geneticslocal adaptationPinus

Identifiers

PMID28035257
PMCPMC5192886

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.