Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37395482›Full record

ArticleEvolution; international journal of organic evolution2023

Evaluating power to detect recurrent selective sweeps under increasingly realistic evolutionary null models.

Vivak Soni, Parul Johri, Jeffrey D Jensen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolution; international journal of organic evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Malaria control and the unexpected spread of diagnostic-resistantbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Towards an evolutionary baseline model ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Inferring the demographic history of aye-ayes (bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Vivak SoniSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9496-9562
Parul JohriSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-4003-7719
Jeffrey D JensenSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States.

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

The detection of selective sweeps from population genomic data often relies on the premise that the beneficial mutations in question have fixed very near the sampling time. As it has been previously shown that the power to detect a selective sweep is strongly dependent on the time since fixation as well as the strength of selection, it is naturally the case that strong, recent sweeps leave the strongest signatures. However, the biological reality is that beneficial mutations enter populations at a rate, one that partially determines the mean wait time between sweep events and hence their age distribution. An important question thus remains about the power to detect recurrent selective sweeps when they are modeled by a realistic mutation rate and as part of a realistic distribution of fitness effects, as opposed to a single, recent, isolated event on a purely neutral background as is more commonly modeled. Here we use forward-in-time simulations to study the performance of commonly used sweep statistics, within the context of more realistic evolutionary baseline models incorporating purifying and background selection, population size change, and mutation and recombination rate heterogeneity. Results demonstrate the important interplay of these processes, necessitating caution when interpreting selection scans; specifically, false-positive rates are in excess of true-positive across much of the evaluated parameter space, and selective sweeps are often undetectable unless the strength of selection is exceptionally strong.

Indexed as

Genetics, PopulationSelection, GeneticBiological EvolutionModels, GeneticMutationbackground selectiondemographydistribution of fitness effectsgenetic hitchhikinggenome scansselective sweeps

Identifiers

PMID37395482
PMCPMC10547124

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.