ArticleGenes2020
Rewriting Human History and Empowering Indigenous Communities with Genome Editing Tools.
Article in Genes, 2020. 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.
- Recombination map tailored to Native Hawaiians may improve robustness of genomic scans for positive selection.Human genetics · 2024Article
- Integrating the Thrifty Genotype and Evolutionary Mismatch Hypotheses to understand variation in cardiometabolic disease risk.Evolution, medicine, and public health · 2024Review
- "Where do I even start?" Recommendations for faculty diversifying syllabi in ecology, evolution, and the life sciences.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Base Editing in Human Cells to Produce Single-Nucleotide-Variant Clonal Cell Lines.Current protocols in molecular biology · 2020Article
- Generations of genomes: advances in paleogenomics technology and engagement for Indigenous people of the Americas.Current opinion in genetics & development · 2020Review
- Seq-ing Higher Ground: Functional Investigation of Adaptive Variation Associated With High-Altitude Adaptation.Frontiers in genetics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Appropriate empirical-based evidence and detailed theoretical considerations should be used for evolutionary explanations of phenotypic variation observed in the field of human population genetics (especially Indigenous populations). Investigators within the population genetics community frequently overlook the importance of these criteria when associating observed phenotypic variation with evolutionary explanations. A functional investigation of population-specific variation using cutting-edge genome editing tools has the potential to empower the population genetics community by holding "just-so" evolutionary explanations accountable. Here, we detail currently available precision genome editing tools and methods, with a particular emphasis on base editing, that can be applied to functionally investigate population-specific point mutations. We use the recent identification of thrifty mutations in the
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.