Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38507461›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2024

A quantitative genetic model of background selection in humans.

Vince Buffalo, Andrew D Kern

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
7.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Pervasive cryptic selection in the human noncoding genome.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Background selection in recombining genomes and its consequences for the maintenance of variation in complex traits.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  5. ThebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. A model for background selection in non-equilibrium populations.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vince BuffaloDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, California, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4510-1609
Andrew D KernInstitute of Ecology and Evolution and Department of Biology, University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-4381-4680
University of Oregon · US

Funding

Deep learning for population geneticsR01HG010774 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI ANDREW D KERN · 2020 to 2026
$3.2M
Computational Population GeneticsR35GM148253 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF OREGON · PI ANDREW D KERN · 2023 to 2026
$1.5M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG010774NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM148253
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Across the human genome, there are large-scale fluctuations in genetic diversity caused by the indirect effects of selection. This "linked selection signal" reflects the impact of selection according to the physical placement of functional regions and recombination rates along chromosomes. Previous work has shown that purifying selection acting against the steady influx of new deleterious mutations at functional portions of the genome shapes patterns of genomic variation. To date, statistical efforts to estimate purifying selection parameters from linked selection models have relied on classic Background Selection theory, which is only applicable when new mutations are so deleterious that they cannot fix in the population. Here, we develop a statistical method based on a quantitative genetics view of linked selection, that models how polygenic additive fitness variance distributed along the genome increases the rate of stochastic allele frequency change. By jointly predicting the equilibrium fitness variance and substitution rate due to both strong and weakly deleterious mutations, we estimate the distribution of fitness effects (DFE) and mutation rate across three geographically distinct human samples. While our model can accommodate weaker selection, we find evidence of strong selection operating similarly across all human samples. Although our quantitative genetic model of linked selection fits better than previous models, substitution rates of the most constrained sites disagree with observed divergence levels. We find that a model incorporating selective interference better predicts observed divergence in conserved regions, but overall our results suggest uncertainty remains about the processes generating fitness variation in humans.

Indexed as

Models, GeneticSelection, GeneticEvolution, MolecularGene FrequencyGenetic FitnessGenetic VariationGenome, HumanHumansMutation

Identifiers

PMID38507461
PMCPMC10984650
OpenAlexW4392983258

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.