Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37089401›Full record

ArticleAnnual review of ecology, evolution, and systematics2021

Effects of Selection at Linked Sites on Patterns of Genetic Variability.

Brian Charlesworth, Jeffrey D Jensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annual review of ecology, evolution, and systematics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
111citing 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

111 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Pervasive cryptic selection in the human noncoding genome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Brian CharlesworthInstitute of Evolutionary Biology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3FL, United Kingdom.
Jeffrey D JensenSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona 85281, USA.

Funding

On differentiating selective and neutral evolutionary processesR35GM139383 · NIGMS · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI JENSEN, JEFFREY D · 2021 to 2025
$3.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM139383
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patterns of variation and evolution at a given site in a genome can be strongly influenced by the effects of selection at genetically linked sites. In particular, the recombination rates of genomic regions correlate with their amount of within-population genetic variability, the degree to which the frequency distributions of DNA sequence variants differ from their neutral expectations, and the levels of adaptation of their functional components. We review the major population genetic processes that are thought to lead to these patterns, focusing on their effects on patterns of variability: selective sweeps, background selection, associative overdominance, and Hill-Robertson interference among deleterious mutations. We emphasize the difficulties in distinguishing among the footprints of these processes and disentangling them from the effects of purely demographic factors such as population size changes. We also discuss how interactions between selective and demographic processes can significantly affect patterns of variability within genomes.

Indexed as

associative overdominancebackground selectiongenetic recombinationHill–Robertson interferencehitchhikingselective sweeps

Identifiers

PMID37089401
PMCPMC10120885

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.