ArticleGenome biology and evolution2024
Background Selection From Unlinked Sites Causes Nonindependent Evolution of Deleterious Mutations.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Causal inference clarifies the roles of background selection and mutation rate variation in shaping human genetic diversity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Extinction vortices are driven more by a shortage of beneficial mutations than by deleterious mutation accumulation.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Estimating the Reduction in Genetic Diversity from Background Selection under Non-equilibrium Demography and Partial Selfing.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Alternative Mutational Architectures Producing Identical M-Matrices can Lead to Different Patterns of Evolutionary Divergence.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Human deleterious mutation rate slows adaptation and implies high fitness variance.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Population size rescaling significantly biases outcomes of forward-in-time population genetic simulations.Genetics · 2025Article
- Population size rescaling significantly biases outcomes of forward-in-time population genetic simulations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Population genetic simulation: Benchmarking frameworks for non-standard models of natural selection.Molecular ecology resources · 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
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background selection describes the reduction in neutral diversity caused by selection against deleterious alleles at other loci. It is typically assumed that the purging of deleterious alleles affects linked neutral variants, and indeed simulations typically only treat a genomic window. However, background selection at unlinked loci also depresses neutral diversity. In agreement with previous analytical approximations, in our simulations of a human-like genome with a realistically high genome-wide deleterious mutation rate, the effects of unlinked background selection exceed those of linked background selection. Background selection reduces neutral genetic diversity by a factor that is independent of census population size. Outside of genic regions, the strength of background selection increases with the mean selection coefficient, contradicting the linked theory but in agreement with the unlinked theory. Neutral diversity within genic regions is fairly independent of the strength of selection. Deleterious genetic load among haploid individuals is underdispersed, indicating nonindependent evolution of deleterious mutations. Empirical evidence for underdispersion was previously interpreted as evidence for global epistasis, but we recover it from a non-epistatic model.
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.