ArticleGenome biology and evolution2019
The Impact of Natural Selection on Short Insertion and Deletion Variation in the Great Tit Genome.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multispecies pangenomes reveal a pervasive influence of population size on structural variation.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Identification and Validation of Genus/Species-Specific Short InDels in Dairy Ruminants.BMC veterinary research · 2025Article
- Comparative population pangenomes reveal unexpected complexity and fitness effects of structural variants.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Insertions and Deletions: Computational Methods, Evolutionary Dynamics, and Biological Applications.Molecular biology and evolution · 2024Review
- Insertion-Deletion Events Are Depleted in Protein Regions with Predicted Secondary Structure.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Article
- Channel nuclear pore protein 54 directs sexual differentiation and neuronal wiring of female reproductive behaviors in Drosophila.BMC biology · 2021Article
- Purifying selection on noncoding deletions of human regulatory loci detected using their cellular pleiotropy.Genome research · 2021Article
- A Study of Faster-Z Evolution in the Great Tit (Parus major).Genome biology and evolution · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Insertions and deletions (INDELs) remain understudied, despite being the most common form of genetic variation after single nucleotide polymorphisms. This stems partly from the challenge of correctly identifying the ancestral state of an INDEL and thus identifying it as an insertion or a deletion. Erroneously assigned ancestral states can skew the site frequency spectrum, leading to artificial signals of selection. Consequently, the selective pressures acting on INDELs are, at present, poorly resolved. To tackle this issue, we have recently published a maximum likelihood approach to estimate the mutation rate and the distribution of fitness effects for INDELs. Our approach estimates and controls for the rate of ancestral state misidentification, overcoming issues plaguing previous INDEL studies. Here, we apply the method to INDEL polymorphism data from ten high coverage (∼44×) European great tit (Parus major) genomes. We demonstrate that coding INDELs are under strong purifying selection with a small proportion making it into the population (∼4%). However, among fixed coding INDELs, 71% of insertions and 86% of deletions are fixed by positive selection. In noncoding regions, we estimate ∼80% of insertions and ∼52% of deletions are effectively neutral, the remainder show signatures of purifying selection. Additionally, we see evidence of linked selection reducing INDEL diversity below background levels, both in proximity to exons and in areas of low recombination.
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.