Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29940087›Full record

ReviewMolecular ecology2018

Evaluating genomic signatures of "the large X-effect" during complex speciation.

Daven C Presgraves

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular ecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 130 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Evolution of genome-wide barriers to gene flow during complex speciation in rattlesnakes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Do genetic loci that cause reproductive isolation in the lab inhibit gene flow in nature?Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2024
    Article
  17. A polygenic explanation for Haldane's rule in butterflies.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 100 years of Haldane's rule.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2023
    Review

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daven C PresgravesDepartment of Biology, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.
University of Rochester · US

Funding

Investigating the special role of sex chromosomes in speciation: discovering the molecular identities, functions, and evolutionary histories of X-linked hybrid male sterility genes in DrosophilaR01GM123194 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN · PI MEIKLEJOHN, COLIN D · 2017 to 2020
$1.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM123194
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ubiquity of the "two rules of speciation"-Haldane's rule and the large X-effect-implies a general, special role for sex chromosomes in the evolution of intrinsic postzygotic reproductive isolation. The recent proliferation of genome-scale analyses has revealed two further general observations: (a) complex speciation involving some form of gene flow is not uncommon, and (b) sex chromosomes in male- and in female-heterogametic taxa tend to show elevated differentiation relative to autosomes. Together, these observations are consistent with speciation histories in which population genetic differentiation at autosomal loci is reduced by gene flow while natural selection against hybrid incompatibilities renders sex chromosomes relatively refractory to gene flow. Here, I summarize multilocus population genetic and population genomic evidence for greater differentiation on the X (or Z) vs. the autosomes and consider the possible causes. I review common population genetic circumstances involving no selection and/or no interspecific gene flow that are nevertheless expected to elevate differentiation on sex chromosomes relative to autosomes. I then review theory for why large X-effects exist for hybrid incompatibilities and, more generally, for loci mediating local adaptation. The observed levels of sex chromosome vs. autosomal differentiation, in many cases, appear consistent with simple explanations requiring neither large X-effects nor gene flow. Discerning signatures of large X-effects during complex speciation will therefore require analyses that go beyond chromosome-scale summaries of population genetic differentiation, explicitly test for differential introgression, and/or integrate experimental genetic data.

Indexed as

Gene FlowGenetic SpeciationGenetics, PopulationReproductive IsolationAnimalsFemaleMaleModels, GeneticPlantsSex Chromosomesgene flowHaldane's rulelarge X-effectsex chromosomesspeciation

Identifiers

PMID29940087
PMCPMC6705125
OpenAlexW2811093602

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.