ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2022
The "New Synthesis".
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sperm, egg, and embryo proteins critical for genetic adaptation of herring to low salinity in the Baltic Sea.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Beyond Mendel: a call to revisit the genotype-phenotype map through new experimental paradigms.Genetics · 2026Article
- Article
- From whole bodies to single cells: A guide to transcriptomic approaches for ecology and evolutionary biology.Molecular ecology · 2025Review
- Repeatability of evolution and genomic predictions of temperature adaptation in seed beetles.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025Article
- Temporal and habitat adaptations in Drosophila subobscura populations: changes in chromosomal inversions.Genetica · 2025Article
- Bioengineering hybrid artificial life.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- The Ecology of Hybrid Incompatibilities.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2024Review
- Chasing the mechanisms of ecologically adaptive salinity tolerance.Plant communications · 2023Review
- The genomic response to urbanization in the damselflyEvolutionary applications · 2023Article
- Article
- Taking quantitative genomics into the wild.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2022Article
- The challenge of demonstrating contemporary natural selection on polygenic quantitative traits in the wild.Molecular ecology · 2022Article
- Gregor Johann Mendel and the development of modern evolutionary biology.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When Mendel's work was rediscovered in 1900, and extended to establish classical genetics, it was initially seen in opposition to Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection on continuous variation, as represented by the biometric research program that was the foundation of quantitative genetics. As Fisher, Haldane, and Wright established a century ago, Mendelian inheritance is exactly what is needed for natural selection to work efficiently. Yet, the synthesis remains unfinished. We do not understand why sexual reproduction and a fair meiosis predominate in eukaryotes, or how far these are responsible for their diversity and complexity. Moreover, although quantitative geneticists have long known that adaptive variation is highly polygenic, and that this is essential for efficient selection, this is only now becoming appreciated by molecular biologists-and we still do not have a good framework for understanding polygenic variation or diffuse function.
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.