Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35612998›Full record

ArticleMolecular ecology2022

What inversion lengths can tell us about their evolution.

Andrius J Dagilis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular ecology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Andrius J DagilisBiology Department, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2013-0825

Funding

Tri-Institutional Molecular Mycology and Pathogenesis Training ProgramT32AI052080 · NIAID · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI ANDREW ALSPAUGH, JOSEPH HEITMAN · 2003 to 2026
$8.7M
NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI052080
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome structural differences, such as inversions, are extremely common between species and within populations. Theoretical models of how and why such inversions evolve have affirmed that they are able to evolve under both adaptive and nonadaptive scenarios (reviewed in Kirkpatrick, 2010). What has remained difficult, however, is distinguishing these scenarios from each other. In this issue of Molecular Ecology, Connallon and Olito (2022) present a model that examines how adaptive and nonadaptive scenarios lead to different distributions of inversion sizes. The authors present several important predictions including an expectation that larger inversions should evolve under local adaptation scenarios and much smaller inversions should evolve when they are either underdominant or directly beneficial. Finally, the authors ask how the presence of deleterious mutations within populations affects the probability of fixing inversions of different types. The study is therefore an important step in synthesizing decades of inversion theory.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularModels, GeneticAdaptation, PhysiologicalChromosome InversionGenomeHumansinversionspopulation geneticsstructural variation

Identifiers

PMID35612998
PMCPMC10200029

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.