Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34424587›Full record

ArticleMolecular ecology2021

Expanding the conservation genomics toolbox: Incorporating structural variants to enhance genomic studies for species of conservation concern.

Jana Wold, Klaus-Peter Koepfli, Stephanie J Galla, David Eccles, Carolyn J Hogg, Marissa F Le Lec, Joseph Guhlin, Anna W Santure, Tammy E Steeves

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular ecology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 57 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

9 authors at 7 institutions in 4 countries.

Jana WoldSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-8095-4282
Klaus-Peter KoepfliSmithsonian-Mason School of Conservation, Front Royal, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7281-0676
Stephanie J GallaSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-4650-8067
David EcclesMalaghan Institute of Medical Research, Wellington, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-4634-4995
Carolyn J HoggSchool of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6328-398X
Marissa F Le LecDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0002-6724-9519
Joseph GuhlinDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-3264-7178
Anna W SantureSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-8965-1042
Tammy E SteevesSchool of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-2112-5761
University of Canterbury · NZUniversity of Otago · NZBoise State University · USITMO University · RUMalaghan Institute of Medical Research · NZThe University of Sydney · AUUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

NSF Track 2 EPSCoR Program OIA-1826801
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Structural variants (SVs) are large rearrangements (>50 bp) within the genome that impact gene function and the content and structure of chromosomes. As a result, SVs are a significant source of functional genomic variation, that is, variation at genomic regions underpinning phenotype differences, that can have large effects on individual and population fitness. While there are increasing opportunities to investigate functional genomic variation in threatened species via single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) data sets, SVs remain understudied despite their potential influence on fitness traits of conservation interest. In this future-focused Opinion, we contend that characterizing SVs offers the conservation genomics community an exciting opportunity to complement SNP-based approaches to enhance species recovery. We also leverage the existing literature-predominantly in human health, agriculture and ecoevolutionary biology-to identify approaches for readily characterizing SVs and consider how integrating these into the conservation genomics toolbox may transform the way we manage some of the world's most threatened species.

Indexed as

GenomeGenomicsAnimalsEndangered SpeciesHumansPhenotypeconservation geneticsfitness traitsfunctional diversitygenome-wide diversitypangenomesstructural variation

Identifiers

PMID34424587
PMCPMC9290615
OpenAlexW3121781082

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.