ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2021
Accurate, ultra-low coverage genome reconstruction and association studies in Hybrid Swarm mapping populations.
Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Insecticide resistance evolution and assisted gene flow interact to shape the evolution of plasticity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Overwintering drives rapid adaptation in Drosophila with potential costs to insecticide resistance.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2026Article
- Phenome-wide association study in 25,639 pregnant Chinese women reveals loci associated with maternal comorbidities and child health.Cell genomics · 2024Article
- Powerful, efficient QTL mapping in Drosophila melanogaster using bulked phenotyping and pooled sequencing.Genetics · 2022Article
- Unique genetic signatures of local adaptation over space and time for diapause, an ecologically relevant complex trait, in Drosophila melanogaster.PLoS 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic association studies seek to uncover the link between genotype and phenotype, and often utilize inbred reference panels as a replicable source of genetic variation. However, inbred reference panels can differ substantially from wild populations in their genotypic distribution, patterns of linkage-disequilibrium, and nucleotide diversity. As a result, associations discovered using inbred reference panels may not reflect the genetic basis of phenotypic variation in natural populations. To address this problem, we evaluated a mapping population design where dozens to hundreds of inbred lines are outbred for few generations, which we call the Hybrid Swarm. The Hybrid Swarm approach has likely remained underutilized relative to pre-sequenced inbred lines due to the costs of genome-wide genotyping. To reduce sequencing costs and make the Hybrid Swarm approach feasible, we developed a computational pipeline that reconstructs accurate whole genomes from ultra-low-coverage (0.05X) sequence data in Hybrid Swarm populations derived from ancestors with phased haplotypes. We evaluate reconstructions using genetic variation from the Drosophila Genetic Reference Panel as well as variation from neutral simulations. We compared the power and precision of Genome-Wide Association Studies using the Hybrid Swarm, inbred lines, recombinant inbred lines (RILs), and highly outbred populations across a range of allele frequencies, effect sizes, and genetic architectures. Our simulations show that these different mapping panels vary in their power and precision, largely depending on the architecture of the trait. The Hybrid Swam and RILs outperform inbred lines for quantitative traits, but not for monogenic ones. Taken together, our results demonstrate the feasibility of the Hybrid Swarm as a cost-effective method of fine-scale genetic mapping.
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.