Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31975179›Full record

ArticleMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2020

Population Genomics in the Great Apes.

David Castellano, Kasper Munch

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

2 authors.

David CastellanoBioinformatics and Genomics, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology (BIST), Barcelona, Spain.
Kasper MunchBioinformatics Research Centre, Aarhus University, Aarhus C, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The great apes play an important role as model organisms. They are our closest living relatives, allowing us to identify the genetic basis of phenotypic traits that we think of as characteristically human. However, the most significant asset of great apes as model organisms is that they share with humans most of their genetic makeup. This means that we can extend our vast knowledge of the human genome, its genes, and the associated phenotypes to these species. Comparative genomic studies of humans and apes thus reveal how very similar genomes react when exposed to different population genetic regimes. In this way, each species represents a natural experiment, where a genome highly similar to the human one, is differently exposed to the evolutionary forces of demography, population structure, selection, recombination, and admixture/hybridization. The initial sequencing of reference genomes for chimpanzee, orangutan, gorilla, the bonobo, each provided new insights and a second generation of sequencing projects has provided diversity data for all the great apes. In this chapter, we will outline some of the findings that population genomic analysis of great apes has provided, and how comparative studies have helped us understand how the fundamental forces in evolution have contributed to shaping the genomes and the genetic diversity of the great apes.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationAnimalsEvolution, MolecularGenetics, PopulationGenomicsHominidaeHumansPhenotypeDemographyDistribution of fitness effectsGreat apesIncomplete lineage sortingPopulation genomicsRecombinationSelective sweepsX chromosome

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.