Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41094588›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2025

Reference genome bias in light of species-specific chromosomal reorganization and translocations.

Marius F Maurstad, Siv Nam Khang Hoff, José Cerca, Mark Ravinet, Ian Bradbury, Kjetill S Jakobsen, Kim Præbel, Sissel Jentoft

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. What Do We Know About Hybrid Blue (Ecology and evolution · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Marius F MaurstadCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7894-1693
Siv Nam Khang HoffCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8113-338X
José CercaCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7788-4367
Mark RavinetCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2841-1798
Ian BradburyFisheries and Oceans Canada, Newfoundland, St John's, Canada.
Kjetill S JakobsenCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8861-5397
Kim PræbelNorwegian College of Fishery Science, The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0681-1854
Sissel JentoftCentre for Ecological and Evolutionary Synthesis, Department of Biosciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. sissel.jentoft@ibv.uio.no.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8707-531X

Funding

Norges Forskningsråd 276730Wellcome Trust 222378
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWhole-genome sequencing efforts, have during the past decade, unveiled the central role of genomic rearrangements-such as chromosomal inversions-in evolutionary processes, including local adaptation in a wide range of taxa. However, employment of reference genomes from distantly or even closely related species for mapping and the subsequent variant calling can lead to errors and/or biases in the datasets generated for downstream analyses.

resultsHere, we capitalize on the recently generated chromosome-anchored genome assemblies for Arctic cod (Arctogadus glacialis), polar cod (Boreogadus saida), and Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) to evaluate the extent and consequences of reference bias on population sequencing datasets (approx. 15-20 × coverage) for both Arctic cod and polar cod. Our findings demonstrate that the choice of reference genome impacts the mapping statistics, including mapping depth and mapping quality, as well as core population genetic estimates, such as heterozygosity levels, nucleotide diversity (π), and cross-species genetic divergence (D

conclusionsInaccurate identification of chromosomal rearrangements as well as biased population genetic measures could potentially lead to erroneous interpretation of species-specific genomic diversity, impede the resolution of local adaptation, and thus, impact predictions of their genomic potential to respond to climatic and other environmental perturbations.

Indexed as

GenomeTranslocation, GeneticAnimalsChromosome InversionChromosome MappingSpecies SpecificityWhole Genome SequencingComparative genomicsGenome assembliesInversion scoringPopulation genetic measurementsReference bias

Identifiers

PMID41094588
PMCPMC12523119

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.