Cited by 352Forensic and Genetic ResearchGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyGenetic diversity and population structure

Genome-wide scans for footprints of natural selection

Open access
Oleksyk, Taras K., Smith, Michael W., O'Brien, Stephen J.·2010·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

Detecting recent selected ‘genomic footprints’ applies directly to the discovery of disease genes and in the imputation of the formative events that molded modern population genetic structure. The imprints of historic selection/adaptation episodes left in human and animal genomes allow one to interpret modern and ancestral gene origins and modifications. Current approaches to reveal selected regions applied in genome-wide selection scans (GWSSs) fall into eight principal categories: (I) phylogenetic footprinting, (II) detecting increased rates of functional mutations, (III) evaluating divergence versus polymorphism, (IV) detecting extended segments of linkage disequilibrium, (V) evaluating local reduction in genetic variation, (VI) detecting changes in the shape of the frequency distribution (spectrum) of genetic variation, (VII) assessing differentiating between populations ( F ST ), and (VIII) detecting excess or decrease in admixture contribution from one population. Here, we review and compare these approaches using available human genome-wide datasets to provide independent verification (or not) of regions found by different methods and using different populations. The lessons learned from GWSSs will be applied to identify genome signatures of historic selective pressures on genes and gene regions in other species with emerging genome sequences. This would offer considerable potential for genome annotation in functional, developmental and evolutionary contexts.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.2009.0219

Cites

159 of 159 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Rsb is a powerful method to detect selection signature when the selected allele has reached fixation.

    “in agreement with Rsb being a powerful method to detect selection signature when the selected allele has reached fixation (Tang et al., 2007; Oleksyk et al., 2010; Bahbahani et al., 2018).”

    From Identification of Candidate Signature Genes and Key Regulators Associated With Trypanotolerance in the Sheko Breed (2019) · cites this paper as Oleksyk et al., 2010

    The Extended linkage disequilibrium segments section discusses haplotype-based tests for detecting selection, but does not identify Rsb or assess its power when an allele has reached fixation. Searches for “Rsb,” “fixation,” and fixed sweeps found no passage addressing that specific claim; the section instead describes LD tests as most useful for recent, incomplete sweeps. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 161 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Maynard Smith J. Haigh J. 1974 The hitchhiking effect of a favorable gene. Genet Res 23, 23– 35 4407212
  2. Tajima F. 1993 Simple methods for testing molecular clock hypothesis. Genetics 135, 599– 607 8244016 PMC1205659

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Oleksyk, T. K., Smith, M. W., & O'Brien, S. J.
Affiliations
  • Biology Department, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, Mayaguez 00681, Puerto Rico
  • National Cancer Institute (US)
  • Laboratory of Genomic Diversity, National Cancer Institute at Frederick, Frederick, MD 21702, USA
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2010-01-12
Volume
365
Issue
1537
Pages
185-205
ISSN
  • 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-2970
OpenAlex
W2143606043
Cited by
340
References
161
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 27 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 31 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 27 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 18
FWCI
1.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • NSUWorks (Nova Southeastern University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (N01CO12400)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Forensic and Genetic Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic diversity and population structure
Keywords
natural selection, linkage disequilibrium, genetic variation, genetic differentiation, F(ST), admixture, disease-associated genes, phylogenetic footprinting, functional mutations, genome annotation, human genome, animal genomes
MeSH terms
Animals, Base Sequence, Humans, Phylogeny, Selection, Genetic, Genetic Variation, Genome, Human, Evolution, Molecular, Genome-Wide Association Study

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review