ArticlePloS one2018
Recombination and peak jumping.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Implications From the Analogous Relationship Between Evolutionary and Learning Processes.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Innovation in viruses: fitness valley crossing, neutral landscapes, or just duplications?Virus evolution · 2024Article
- Getting higher on rugged landscapes: Inversion mutations open access to fitter adaptive peaks in NK fitness landscapes.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Emergence and widespread circulation of a recombinant SARS-CoV-2 lineage in North America.Cell host & microbe · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We show that genetic recombination can be a powerful mechanism for escaping suboptimal peaks. Recent studies of empirical fitness landscapes reveal complex gene interactions and multiple peaks. However, classical work on recombination largely ignores the effect of complex gene interactions. Briefly, we restrict to fitness landscapes where the global peak is difficult to access. If the optimal genotype can be generated by shuffling genes present in the population, then recombination will produce the genotype. If, in addition, recombination is sufficiently rare, then the proportion of the genotype is expected to increase. Specifically, we consider landscapes where shuffling of suboptimal peak genotypes can produce the global peak genotype. The advantage of recombination we identify has no correspondence for 2-locus systems or for smooth landscapes. The effect of recombination indicated is sometimes extreme, also for rare recombination, in the sense that shutting off recombination could result in the organism failing to adapt. A standard question about recombination is whether the mechanism tends to accelerate or decelerate adaptation. However, we argue that extreme effects may be more important than how the majority falls. In a limited sense, our result can be considered a support for Sewall Wright's view that adaptation sometimes works better in subdivided populations.
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.