Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32231687›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2020

Comparing the Performance of Microsatellites and RADseq in Population Genetic Studies: Analysis of Data for Pike (

Johanna Sunde, Yeşerin Yıldırım, Petter Tibblin, Anders Forsman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing 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

59 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Genetic Differences in Purple Finch (Ecology and evolution · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Endangered Pinto/Northern Abalone (Evolutionary applications · 2024
    Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Johanna SundeDepartment of Biology and Environmental Science, Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems, EEMiS, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
Yeşerin YıldırımDepartment of Biology and Environmental Science, Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems, EEMiS, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
Petter TibblinDepartment of Biology and Environmental Science, Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems, EEMiS, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.
Anders ForsmanDepartment of Biology and Environmental Science, Centre for Ecology and Evolution in Microbial Model Systems, EEMiS, Linnaeus University, Kalmar, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Population genetic studies reveal biodiversity patterns and inform about drivers of evolutionary differentiation and adaptation, including gene flow, drift and selection. This can advance our understanding and aid decision making regarding management and conservation efforts. Microsatellites have long been used in population genetic studies. Thanks to the development of newer techniques, sequencing approaches such as restriction site associated DNA sequencing (RADseq) are on their way to replace microsatellites for some applications. However, the performance of these two marker types in population genetics have rarely been systematically compared. We utilized three neutrally and adaptively differentiated populations of anadromous pike (

Indexed as

adaptationdifferentiationEsox luciusgenetic structuremicrosatellitesRADseq

Identifiers

PMID32231687
PMCPMC7082332

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.