Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9539447›Full record

ArticleGenetics1998

Selection with recurrent backcrossing to develop congenic lines for quantitative trait loci analysis.

W G Hill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Selection in backcross programmes.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2005
    Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

1 author.

W G HillInstitute of Cell, Animal and Population Biology, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom. w.g.hill@ed.ac.uk

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

SEWALL WRIGHT suggested that genes of large effect on a quantitative trait could be isolated by recurrent backcrossing with selection on the trait. Loci [quantitative trait loci (QTL)] at which the recurrent and nonrecurrent lines have genes of different large effect on the trait would remain segregating, while other loci would become fixed for the gene carried by the recurrent parent. If the recurrent line is inbred and the backcrossing and selection is conducted in a series of replicate lines, in each of which only one backcross parent is selected for each generation, the lines will become congenic to the recurrent parent except for the QTL of large effect and closely linked regions of the genome, and these regions can be identified using a dense set of markers that differ between the parental lines. Such lines would be particularly valuable for subsequent fine-scale mapping and gene cloning; but by chance, even QTL of large effect will be lost from some lines. The probability that QTL of specified effect remain segregating is computed as a function of its effect on the trait, the intensity of selection, and the number of generations of backcrossing. Analytical formulas are given for one or two loci, and simulation is used for more. It is shown that the method could have substantial discriminating ability and thus potential practical value.

Indexed as

Chromosome MappingCrosses, GeneticQuantitative Trait, HeritableSelection, GeneticGenetic LinkageGenetic Variation

Identifiers

PMID9539447
PMCPMC1460042

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.