ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2025
Purging of Highly Deleterious Mutations Through an Extreme Bottleneck.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- On the Use of the Jackknife to Compare RMolecular ecology resources · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Transitions to captivity often produce population bottlenecks. On the one hand, bottlenecks increase inbreeding and decrease effective population size, thus increasing extinction risk. On the other hand, elevated homozygosity associated with inbreeding may purge deleterious mutations. Previous empirical studies of purging in captive breeding programs have focused on phenotypic measurements. We test natural selection's ability to purge deleterious mutations following an extreme population bottleneck by analyzing patterns of genetic diversity in wild and captive-bred individuals of the Lord Howe Island stick insect, Dryococelus australis. Dryococelus australis has been bred in captivity for two decades, having passed through an extreme bottleneck-only two mating pairs with few new additions since then. The magnitude of the bottleneck together with high female fecundity but low offspring recruitment set up nearly ideal conditions for the purging of deleterious mutations. As expected, captive-bred individuals had a greater number of long runs of homozygosity compared with wild individuals, implying strong inbreeding in captivity which would facilitate purging in homozygous regions. Stop-codon mutations were preferentially depleted in captivity compared with other mutations in coding and noncoding regions. The more deleterious a mutation was predicted to be, the more likely it was found outside of runs of homozygosity, implying that inbreeding facilitates the expression and thus removal of deleterious mutations, even after such an extreme bottleneck and under the benign conditions of captivity. These data implicate inbreeding and recessive deleterious mutation load in fitness variation among captive and wild D. australis.
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.