The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What can patterns of differentiation across plant genomes tell us about adaptation and speciation?
Open accessAbstract
Genome scans have become a common approach to identify genomic signatures of natural selection and reproductive isolation, as well as the genomic bases of ecologically relevant phenotypes, based on patterns of polymorphism and differentiation among populations or species. Here, we review the results of studies taking genome scan approaches in plants, consider the patterns of genomic differentiation documented and their possible causes, discuss the results in light of recent models of genomic differentiation during divergent adaptation and speciation, and consider assumptions and caveats in their interpretation. We find that genomic regions of high divergence generally appear quite small in comparisons of both closely and more distantly related populations, and for the most part, these differentiated regions are spread throughout the genome rather than strongly clustered. Thus, the genome scan approach appears well-suited for identifying genomic regions or even candidate genes that underlie adaptive divergence and/or reproductive barriers. We consider other methodologies that may be used in conjunction with genome scan approaches, and suggest further developments that would be valuable. These include broader use of sequence-based markers of known genomic location, greater attention to sampling strategies to make use of parallel environmental or phenotypic transitions, more integration with approaches such as quantitative trait loci mapping and measures of gene flow across the genome, and additional theoretical and simulation work on processes related to divergent adaptation and speciation.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The genetics of human adaptation: hard sweeps, soft sweeps, and polygenic adaptation
Pritchard, J. K., Pickrell, J. K., & Coop, G. (2010) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2009.11.055 · Cited by 932
Sympatric speciation in palms on an oceanic island
Savolainen, V., Anstett, M.-C., Lexer, C., Hutton, I., Clarkson, J. J., Norup, M. V., Powell, M. P., Springate, D., Salamin, N., & Baker, W. J. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04566 · Cited by 681
Interpreting the estimated timing of migration events between hybridizing species
STRASBURG, J. L., & RIESEBERG, L. H. (2011) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2011.05048.x · Cited by 79
Self-citation
Cited by
Whiteley, A. R., Fitzpatrick, S. W., Funk, W. C., & Tallmon, D. A. (2015) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2014.10.009 · Cited by 813
Andrew, R. L., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2013) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/evo.12106 · Cited by 116
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Strasburg, J. L., Sherman, N. A., Wright, K. M., Moyle, L. C., Willis, J. H., & Rieseberg, L. H.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2012-02-05
- Volume
- 367
- Issue
- 1587
- Pages
- 364-373
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- OpenAlex
- W2127167965
- Cited by
- 205
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 16.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: What can patterns of differentiation across plant genomes tell us about adaptation and speciation? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2011.0199
- The paper
- Strasburg, J. L., Sherman, N. A., Wright, K. M., Moyle, L. C., Willis, J. H., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2012). What can patterns of differentiation across plant genomes tell us about adaptation and speciation? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0199
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.