ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2024
Secondary Contact, Introgressive Hybridization, and Genome Stabilization in Sticklebacks.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rapid genome-wide purging following tsunami-induced hybridization in a stickleback population.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026Article
- A near telomere-to-telomere genome assembly of the Amur stickleback (Zoological research · 2026Article
- Introgression across Narrow Contact Zones Shapes the Genomic Landscape of Phylogenetic Variation in an African Bird Clade.Systematic biology · 2025Article
- Disentangling Complex Histories of Hybridisation: The Genomic Consequences of Ancient and Recent Introgression in Channel Island Monkeyflowers.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
- Sex chromosome turnover in hybridizing stickleback lineages.Evolution letters · 2024Article
- Improved assembly of the Pungitius pungitius reference genome.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Advances in genomic studies have revealed that hybridization in nature is pervasive and raised questions about the dynamics of different genetic and evolutionary factors following the initial hybridization event. While recent research has proposed that the genomic outcomes of hybridization might be predictable to some extent, many uncertainties remain. With comprehensive whole-genome sequence data, we investigated the genetic introgression between 2 divergent lineages of 9-spined sticklebacks (Pungitius pungitius) in the Baltic Sea. We found that the intensity and direction of selection on the introgressed variation has varied across different genomic elements: while functionally important regions displayed reduced rates of introgression, promoter regions showed enrichment. Despite the general trend of negative selection, we identified specific genomic regions that were enriched for introgressed variants, and within these regions, we detected footprints of selection, indicating adaptive introgression. Geographically, we found the selection against the functional changes to be strongest in the vicinity of the secondary contact zone and weaken as a function of distance from the initial contact. Altogether, the results suggest that the stabilization of introgressed variation in the genomes is a complex, multistage process involving both negative and positive selection. In spite of the predominance of negative selection against introgressed variants, we also found evidence for adaptive introgression variants likely associated with adaptation to Baltic Sea environmental conditions.
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.