Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39656753›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2024

Complex Genomic Landscape of Inversion Polymorphism in Europe's Most Destructive Forest Pest.

Anastasiia Mykhailenko, Piotr Zieliński, Aleksandra Bednarz, Fredrik Schlyter, Martin N Andersson, Bernardo Antunes, Zbigniew Borowski, Paal Krokene, Markus Melin, Julia Morales-García and 8 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Bark beetle (Frontiers in plant science · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Competing adaptations maintain nonadaptive variation in a wild cricket population.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    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

18 authors.

Anastasiia MykhailenkoInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-7936-5584
Piotr ZielińskiInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-8533-6800
Aleksandra BednarzInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-2256-2998
Fredrik SchlyterChemical Ecology, Department of Plant Protection Biology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences Alnarp, 234 22 Lomma, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0002-1244-0308
Martin N AnderssonDepartment of Biology, Lund University, 223 62 Lund, Sweden.ORCID 0000-0001-9807-8524
Bernardo AntunesInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-6092-4219
Zbigniew BorowskiDepartament of Forest Ecology, Forest Research Institute, 05-090 Raszyn, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4109-5205
Paal KrokeneDivision of Biotechnology and Plant Health, Norwegian Institute of Bioeconomy Research, 1433 Ås, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-7205-0715
Markus MelinForest Health and Bidiversity Group, Natural Resources Institute Finland, 80100 Joensuu, Finland.ORCID 0000-0001-7290-9203
Julia Morales-GarcíaInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4169-2253
Jörg MüllerField Station Fabrikschleichach, Animal Ecology and Tropical Biology, Biocenter, University of Würzburg, 96181 Rauhenebrach, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1409-1586
Zuzanna NowakInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0009-0001-0653-4076
Martin SchebeckInstitute of Forest Entomology, Forest Pathology and Forest Protection, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna (BOKU), 1190 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-7376-4878
Christian StaufferInstitute of Forest Entomology, Forest Pathology and Forest Protection, Department of Forest and Soil Sciences, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna (BOKU), 1190 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-2985-8911
Heli ViiriUPM Forest, UPM-Kymmene, 33100 Tampere, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-3952-9481
Julia ZaborowskaInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-9225-9129
Wiesław BabikInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-1698-6615
Krystyna Nadachowska-BrzyskaInstitute of Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Jagiellonian University, 30-387 Kraków, Poland.ORCID 0000-0002-8457-310X

Funding

Foundation in Memory of Oscar and Lili LammPolish National Science Center 2018/30/E/NZ8/00105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In many species, polymorphic genomic inversions underlie complex phenotypic polymorphisms and facilitate local adaptation in the face of gene flow. Multiple polymorphic inversions can co-occur in a genome, but the prevalence, evolutionary significance, and limits to complexity of genomic inversion landscapes remain poorly understood. Here, we examine genome-wide genetic variation in one of Europe's most destructive forest pests, the spruce bark beetle Ips typographus, scan for polymorphic inversions, and test whether inversions are associated with key traits in this species. We analyzed 240 individuals from 18 populations across the species' European range and, using a whole-genome resequencing approach, identified 27 polymorphic inversions covering ∼28% of the genome. The inversions vary in size and in levels of intra-inversion recombination, are highly polymorphic across the species range, and often overlap, forming a complex genomic architecture. We found no support for mechanisms such as directional selection, overdominance, and associative overdominance that are often invoked to explain the presence of large inversion polymorphisms in the genome. This suggests that inversions are either neutral or maintained by the combined action of multiple evolutionary forces. We also found that inversions are enriched in odorant receptor genes encoding elements of recognition pathways for host plants, mates, and symbiotic fungi. Our results indicate that the genome of this major forest pest of growing social, political, and economic importance harbors one of the most complex inversion landscapes described to date and raise questions about the limits of intraspecific genomic architecture complexity.

Indexed as

Chromosome InversionGenome, InsectPolymorphism, GeneticAnimalsColeopteraEuropeForestsReceptors, OdorantReceptors, Odorantforest pestgenome complexityIps typographuspolymorphic inversionsspruce bark beetle

Identifiers

PMID39656753
PMCPMC11652730

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.