Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32027643›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2020

Selective sweeps on novel and introgressed variation shape mimicry loci in a butterfly adaptive radiation.

Markus Moest, Steven M Van Belleghem, Jennifer E James, Camilo Salazar, Simon H Martin, Sarah L Barker, Gilson R P Moreira, Claire Mérot, Mathieu Joron, Nicola J Nadeau and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
11.3field-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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A long noncoding RNA at theProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  9. Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Ghost admixture in eastern gorillas.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Three problems in the genetics of speciation by selection.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

12 authors at 9 institutions in 8 countries.

Markus MoestDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-2370-2788
Steven M Van BelleghemDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9399-1007
Jennifer E JamesDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0518-6783
Camilo SalazarBiology Program, Faculty of Natural Sciences and Mathematics, Universidad del Rosario, Bogota D.C., Colombia.ORCID 0000-0001-9217-6588
Simon H MartinDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0747-7456
Sarah L BarkerDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Gilson R P MoreiraDepartamento de Zoologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil.
Claire MérotIBIS, Department of Biology, Université Laval, Québec, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2607-7818
Mathieu JoronCentre d'Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, UMR 5175 CNRS-Université de Montpellier-Université Paul Valéry Montpellier-EPHE, Montpellier, France.ORCID 0000-0003-1043-4147
Nicola J NadeauDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9319-921X
Florian M SteinerDepartment of Ecology, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria.
Chris D JigginsDepartment of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7809-062X
University of Cambridge · GBUniversität Innsbruck · ATCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRUniversidad del Rosario · COUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul · BRUniversité Laval · CAUniversity of Arizona · USUniversity of Puerto Rico at Río Piedras · PRUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R007500
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural selection leaves distinct signatures in the genome that can reveal the targets and history of adaptive evolution. By analysing high-coverage genome sequence data from 4 major colour pattern loci sampled from nearly 600 individuals in 53 populations, we show pervasive selection on wing patterns in the Heliconius adaptive radiation. The strongest signatures correspond to loci with the greatest phenotypic effects, consistent with visual selection by predators, and are found in colour patterns with geographically restricted distributions. These recent sweeps are similar between co-mimics and indicate colour pattern turn-over events despite strong stabilising selection. Using simulations, we compare sweep signatures expected under classic hard sweeps with those resulting from adaptive introgression, an important aspect of mimicry evolution in Heliconius butterflies. Simulated recipient populations show a distinct 'volcano' pattern with peaks of increased genetic diversity around the selected target, characteristic of sweeps of introgressed variation and consistent with diversity patterns found in some populations. Our genomic data reveal a surprisingly dynamic history of colour pattern selection and co-evolution in this adaptive radiation.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAnimalsBiological MimicryButterfliesGene FrequencyGenetic IntrogressionGenetic LociGenetic VariationGenome, InsectPhenotypePhylogeographyPigmentationSelection, GeneticWings, Animal

Identifiers

PMID32027643
PMCPMC7029882
OpenAlexW3004901913

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.