ArticleGenome biology and evolution2025
Inferring the Selective History of CNVs Using a Maximum Likelihood Model.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Copy number variations (CNVs)-structural variations generated by deletion and/or duplication that result in a change in DNA dosage-are prevalent in nature. CNVs can drastically affect the phenotype of an organism and have been shown to be both involved in genetic disorders and be used as raw material in adaptive evolution. Unlike single-nucleotide variations, the often large and varied effects of CNVs on phenotype hinders our ability to infer their selective advantage based on the population genetics data. Here, we present a likelihood-based approach, dubbed PoMoCNV (POlymorphism-aware phylogenetic MOdel for CNVs), that estimates the evolutionary parameters such as mutation rates among different copy numbers and relative fitness loss per copy deletion at a genomic locus based on population genetics data. As a case study, we analyze the genomics data of 40 strains of Caenorhabditis elegans, representing four different populations. We take advantage of the data on chromatin accessibility to interpret the mutation rate and fitness of copy numbers, as inferred by PoMoCNV, specifically in open or closed chromatin loci. We further test the reliability of PoMoCNV by estimating the evolutionary parameters of CNVs for mutation-accumulation experiments in C. elegans with varying levels of genetic drift.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.