Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37732287›Full record

ArticleEcology and evolution2023

Genomic signatures of bottleneck and founder effects in dingoes.

Manoharan Kumar, Gabriel Conroy, Steven Ogbourne, Kylie Cairns, Liesbeth Borburgh, Sankar Subramanian

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecology and evolution, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing 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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Archaeogenomic insights into commensalism and regional variation in pig management in Neolithic northwest Europe.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Manoharan KumarSchool of Science, Technology, and Engineering The University of the Sunshine Coast Moreton Bay Queensland Australia.
Gabriel ConroyCentre for Bioinnovation The University of the Sunshine Coast Sippy Downs Queensland Australia.
Steven OgbourneCentre for Bioinnovation The University of the Sunshine Coast Sippy Downs Queensland Australia.
Kylie CairnsEvolution and Ecology Research Centre, School of Biological, Earth and Environmental Sciences UNSW Australia Sydney New South Wales Australia.
Liesbeth BorburghSchool of Science, Technology, and Engineering The University of the Sunshine Coast Sippy Downs Queensland Australia.
Sankar SubramanianSchool of Science, Technology, and Engineering The University of the Sunshine Coast Moreton Bay Queensland Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2375-3254

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dingoes arrived in Australia during the mid-Holocene and are the top-order terrestrial predator on the continent. Although dingoes subsequently spread across the continent, the initial founding population(s) could have been small. We investigated this hypothesis by sequencing the whole genomes of three dingoes and also obtaining the genome data from nine additional dingoes and 56 canines, including wolves, village dogs and breed dogs, and examined the signatures of bottlenecks and founder effects. We found that the nucleotide diversity of dingoes was low, 36% less than highly inbred breed dogs and 3.3 times lower than wolves. The number of runs of homozygosity (RoH) segments in dingoes was 1.6-4.7 times higher than in other canines. While examining deleterious mutational load, we observed that dingoes carried elevated ratios of nonsynonymous-to-synonymous diversities, significantly higher numbers of homozygous deleterious Single Nucleotide Variants (SNVs), and increased numbers of loss of function SNVs, compared to breed dogs, village dogs, and wolves. Our findings can be explained by bottlenecks and founder effects during the establishment of dingoes in mainland Australia. These findings highlight the need for conservation-based management of dingoes and the need for wildlife managers to be cognisant of these findings when considering the use of lethal control measures across the landscape.

Indexed as

deleterious SNVsdingofounder effectinbreedingmutation loadpopulation bottlenecksmall populations

Identifiers

PMID37732287
PMCPMC10508967

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.