The DOI matches its Crossref record; 47 of the 47 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
HOW ARE DELETERIOUS MUTATIONS PURGED? DRIFT VERSUS NONRANDOM MATING
Abstract
Accumulation of deleterious mutations has important consequences for the evolution of mating systems and the persistence of small populations. It is well established that consanguineous mating can purge a part of the mutation load and that lethal mutations can also be purged in small populations. However, the efficiency of purging in natural populations, due to either consanguineous mating or to reduced population size, has been questioned. Consequences of consanguineous mating systems and small population size are often equated under "inbreeding" because both increase homozygosity, and selection is though to be more efficient against homozygous deleterious alleles. I show that two processes of purging that I call "purging by drift" and "purging by nonrandom mating" have to be distinguished. Conditions under which the two ways of purging are effective are derived. Nonrandom mating can purge deleterious mutations regardless of their dominance level, whereas only highly recessive mutations can be purged by drift. Both types of purging are limited by population size, and sharp thresholds separate domains where purging is either effective or not. The limitations derived here on the efficiency of purging are compatible with some experimental studies. Implications of these results for conservation and evolution of mating systems are discussed.
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
Handbook of Mathematical Functions
McQuarrie, D. A. (1966) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.1972842 · Cited by 40,433
Principles of Population Genetics.
Cormack, R. M., Hartl, D. L., & Clark, A. G. (1990) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2531471 · Cited by 5,242
An introduction to population genetics theory
Crow, J. F., & Kimura, M. (1970) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 4,223
An Introduction to Population Genetics Theory
J., A., Crow, J. F., & Kimura, M. (1971) · Population (French Edition) · doi:10.2307/1529706 · Cited by 3,474
Inbreeding effects in wild populations
Keller, L. (2002) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02489-8 · Cited by 3,309
INBREEDING DEPRESSION AND ITS EVOLUTIONARY CONSEQUENCES
Charlesworth, D., & Charlesworth, B. (1987) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.es.18.110187.001321 · Cited by 3,258
Population Genetic Consequences of Small Population Size: Implications for Plant Conservation
Ellstrand, N. C. (1993) · Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.24.1.217 · Cited by 2,631
The effect of linkage on limits to artificial selection
Hill, W. G., & Robertson, A. (1966) · Genetical Research · doi:10.1017/s0016672300010156 · Cited by 1,823
THE EVOLUTION OF SELF‐FERTILIZATION AND INBREEDING DEPRESSION IN PLANTS. I. GENETIC MODELS
Lande, R., & Schemske, D. W. (1985) · Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb04077.x · Cited by 1,648
The effect of linkage on limits to artificial selection
HILL, W. G., & ROBERTSON, A. (2007) · Genetics Research · doi:10.1017/s001667230800949x · Cited by 1,561
Cited by
Lonely hearts or sex in the city? Density-dependent effects in mating systems
Kokko, H., & Rankin, D. J. (2006) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1784 · Cited by 722
Mountain gorilla genomes reveal the impact of long-term population decline and inbreeding
Xue, Y., Prado-Martinez, J., Sudmant, P. H., Narasimhan, V., Ayub, Q., Szpak, M., Frandsen, P., Chen, Y., Yngvadottir, B., Cooper, D. N., et al. (2015) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaa3952 · Cited by 473
A quantitative review of heterozygosity–fitness correlations in animal populations
CHAPMAN, J. R., NAKAGAWA, S., COLTMAN, D. W., SLATE, J., & SHELDON, B. C. (2009) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-294x.2009.04247.x · Cited by 465
Genetic load: genomic estimates and applications in non-model animals
Bertorelle, G., Raffini, F., Bosse, M., Bortoluzzi, C., Iannucci, A., Trucchi, E., Morales, H. E., & van Oosterhout, C. (2022) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41576-022-00448-x · Cited by 306
Willi, Y., Kristensen, T. N., Sgrò, C. M., Weeks, A. R., Ørsted, M., & Hoffmann, A. A. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2105076119 · Cited by 281
Metadata
- Authors
- Glémin, S.
- Venue
- Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-12
- Volume
- 57
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 2678-2687
- ISSN
- 0014-3820 (ISSN-L)
- 1558-5646
- OpenAlex
- W2174005266
- Cited by
- 371
- References
- 47
- FWCI
- 4.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: HOW ARE DELETERIOUS MUTATIONS PURGED? DRIFT VERSUS NONRANDOM MATING. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb01512.x
- The paper
- Glémin, S. (2003). HOW ARE DELETERIOUS MUTATIONS PURGED? DRIFT VERSUS NONRANDOM MATING. Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0014-3820.2003.tb01512.x
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.
