ArticleGenetics2018
Detecting Recent Positive Selection with a Single Locus Test Bipartitioning the Coalescent Tree.
Article in Genetics, 2018. 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.
- Comparing ARG Inference Methods Under Transmission of Reproductive Success: Tree Imbalance Matters.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Statistical summaries of unlabelled evolutionary trees.Biometrika · 2024Article
- Article
- Article
- Selective Sweeps Under Dominance and Inbreeding.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020Article
- Adaptation in structured populations and fuzzy boundaries between hard and soft sweeps.PLoS computational biology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many population genomic studies have been conducted in the past to search for traces of recent events of positive selection. These traces, however, can be obscured by temporal variation of population size or other demographic factors. To reduce the confounding impact of demography, the coalescent tree topology has been used as an additional source of information for detecting recent positive selection in a population or a species. Based on the branching pattern at the root, we partition the hypothetical coalescent tree, inferred from a sequence sample, into two subtrees. The reasoning is that positive selection could impose a strong impact on branch length in one of the two subtrees while demography has the same effect on average on both subtrees. Thus, positive selection should be detectable by comparing statistics calculated for the two subtrees. Simulations demonstrate that the proposed test based on these principles has high power to detect recent positive selection even when DNA polymorphism data from only one locus is available, and that it is robust to the confounding effect of demography. One feature is that all components in the summary statistics ([Formula: see text]) can be computed analytically. Moreover, misinference of derived and ancestral alleles is seen to have only a limited effect on the test, and it therefore avoids a notorious problem when searching for traces of recent positive selection.
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.