↓ Skip to main content

Navigating the Interface Between Landscape Genetics and Landscape Genomics

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Genetics, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (69th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
73 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
354 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Navigating the Interface Between Landscape Genetics and Landscape Genomics
Published in
Frontiers in Genetics, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fgene.2018.00068
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andrew Storfer, Austin Patton, Alexandra K. Fraik

Abstract

As next-generation sequencing data become increasingly available for non-model organisms, a shift has occurred in the focus of studies of the geographic distribution of genetic variation. Whereas landscape genetics studies primarily focus on testing the effects of landscape variables on gene flow and genetic population structure, landscape genomics studies focus on detecting candidate genes under selection that indicate possible local adaptation. Navigating the transition between landscape genomics and landscape genetics can be challenging. The number of molecular markers analyzed has shifted from what used to be a few dozen loci to thousands of loci and even full genomes. Although genome scale data can be separated into sets of neutral loci for analyses of gene flow and population structure and putative loci under selection for inference of local adaptation, there are inherent differences in the questions that are addressed in the two study frameworks. We discuss these differences and their implications for study design, marker choice and downstream analysis methods. Similar to the rapid proliferation of analysis methods in the early development of landscape genetics, new analytical methods for detection of selection in landscape genomics studies are burgeoning. We focus on genome scan methods for detection of selection, and in particular, outlier differentiation methods and genetic-environment association tests because they are the most widely used. Use of genome scan methods requires an understanding of the potential mismatches between the biology of a species and assumptions inherent in analytical methods used, which can lead to high false positive rates of detected loci under selection. Key to choosing appropriate genome scan methods is an understanding of the underlying demographic structure of study populations, and such data can be obtained using neutral loci from the generated genome-wide data or prior knowledge of a species' phylogeographic history. To this end, we summarize recent simulation studies that test the power and accuracy of genome scan methods under a variety of demographic scenarios and sampling designs. We conclude with a discussion of additional considerations for future method development, and a summary of methods that show promise for landscape genomics studies but are not yet widely used.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 354 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 354 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 74 21%
Student > Master 59 17%
Researcher 50 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 29 8%
Student > Bachelor 29 8%
Other 43 12%
Unknown 70 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 153 43%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 70 20%
Environmental Science 40 11%
Computer Science 3 <1%
Mathematics 2 <1%
Other 11 3%
Unknown 75 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 February 2022.
All research outputs
#6,842,885
of 26,451,700 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Genetics
#1,943
of 13,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#109,698
of 356,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Genetics
#41
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,451,700 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,987 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 356,136 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.