Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Types of Selection01:46

Types of Selection

43.7K
Natural selection influences the frequencies of particular alleles and phenotypes within populations in several different ways. Primarily, natural selection can be directional, stabilizing, or disruptive. Directional selection favors one extreme trait and shifts the population towards that phenotype while selecting against individuals displaying alternate traits. Stabilizing selection favors an intermediate trait with a narrow range of variation. Deviation from the optimal phenotype towards an...
43.7K
Frequency-dependent Selection01:21

Frequency-dependent Selection

23.0K
When the fitness of a trait is influenced by how common it is (i.e., its frequency) relative to different traits within a population, this is referred to as frequency-dependent selection. Frequency-dependent selection may occur between species or within a single species. This type of selection can either be positive—with more common phenotypes having higher fitness—or negative, with rarer phenotypes conferring increased fitness.
23.0K
Incomplete Dominance01:43

Incomplete Dominance

29.5K
Gregor Mendel's work (1822 - 1884) was primarily focused on pea plants. Through his initial experiments, he determined that every gene in a diploid cell has two variants called alleles inherited from each parent. He suggested that amongst these two alleles, one allele is dominant in character and the other recessive. The combination of alleles determines the phenotype of a gene in an organism.
29.5K
Genetic Screens02:46

Genetic Screens

5.5K
Genetic screens are tools used to identify genes and mutations responsible for phenotypes of interest. Genetic screens help identify individuals or a group of people at risk of developing  genetic diseases and help them with early intervention, targeted therapy, and reproductive options.
Forward genetic screens
Forward or “classical” genetic screens involve creating random mutations in an organism’s DNA using radiation, mutagens, or insertion of additional bases, which...
5.5K
Monohybrid Crosses01:20

Monohybrid Crosses

238.5K
Overview
238.5K
Genetic Drift03:33

Genetic Drift

42.7K
Natural selection—probably the most well-known evolutionary mechanism—increases the prevalence of traits that enhance survival and reproduction. However, evolution does not merely propagate favorable traits, nor does it always benefit populations.
42.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Long-read sequencing of primate testis and human sperm allows identification of recombination events in individuals.

Nature communications·2025
Same author

In silico prediction of variant effects: promises and limitations for precision plant breeding.

TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik·2025
Same author

Perspectives on mating-system evolution: comparing concepts in plants and animals.

Journal of evolutionary biology·2025
Same author

Estimating Gene Conversion Tract Length and Rate From PacBio HiFi Data.

Molecular biology and evolution·2025
Same author

Natural variation in root exudate composition in the genetically structured Arabidopsis thaliana in the Iberian Peninsula.

The New phytologist·2024
Same author

The Composition of the Fecal and Mucosa-adherent Microbiota Varies Based on Age and Disease Activity in Ulcerative Colitis.

Inflammatory bowel diseases·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 30, 2025

Frequency and Distribution of Crossovers in Caenorhabditis elegans Meiosis by SNP Genotyping using Real-time PCR
06:18

Frequency and Distribution of Crossovers in Caenorhabditis elegans Meiosis by SNP Genotyping using Real-time PCR

Published on: July 11, 2025

725

Selective Sweeps Under Dominance and Inbreeding.

Matthew Hartfield1,2,3, Thomas Bataillon2

  • 1Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto, Ontario M5S 3B2, Canada, m.hartfield@ed.ac.uk.

G3 (Bethesda, Md.)
|January 25, 2020
PubMed
Summary

This study explores how self-fertilization and dominance impact genetic signatures of positive selection, known as selective sweeps. Findings reveal these factors alter sweep patterns, complicating the distinction between hard and soft sweeps.

Keywords:
AdaptationDominancePopulation GeneticsSelective SweepsSelf-fertilisation

More Related Videos

Shifting Zebrafish Lethal Skeletal Mutant Penetrance by Progeny Testing
08:39

Shifting Zebrafish Lethal Skeletal Mutant Penetrance by Progeny Testing

Published on: September 1, 2017

8.0K
Induction and Evaluation of Inbreeding Crosses Using the Ant, Vollenhovia Emeryi
06:44

Induction and Evaluation of Inbreeding Crosses Using the Ant, Vollenhovia Emeryi

Published on: October 5, 2018

8.0K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Dec 30, 2025

Frequency and Distribution of Crossovers in Caenorhabditis elegans Meiosis by SNP Genotyping using Real-time PCR
06:18

Frequency and Distribution of Crossovers in Caenorhabditis elegans Meiosis by SNP Genotyping using Real-time PCR

Published on: July 11, 2025

725
Shifting Zebrafish Lethal Skeletal Mutant Penetrance by Progeny Testing
08:39

Shifting Zebrafish Lethal Skeletal Mutant Penetrance by Progeny Testing

Published on: September 1, 2017

8.0K
Induction and Evaluation of Inbreeding Crosses Using the Ant, Vollenhovia Emeryi
06:44

Induction and Evaluation of Inbreeding Crosses Using the Ant, Vollenhovia Emeryi

Published on: October 5, 2018

8.0K

Area of Science:

  • Evolutionary Genetics
  • Population Genetics
  • Molecular Evolution

Background:

  • Identifying loci under positive selection is a key goal in evolutionary genetics.
  • Selective sweeps, including hard and soft sweeps, are patterns indicating positive selection.
  • Current theories often overlook the effects of dominance and inbreeding on sweep dynamics.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the influence of arbitrary dominance and self-fertilization on hard and soft selective sweep signatures.
  • To understand how these factors affect the detectability and characteristics of selective sweeps.
  • To propose methods for differentiating between hard and soft sweep scenarios.

Main Methods:

  • Theoretical modeling of selective sweep patterns.
  • Analysis of genetic data under varying degrees of self-fertilization and dominance.
  • Comparison of sweep signatures in outcrossing versus self-fertilizing populations.

Main Results:

  • Increased self-fertilization maintains sweep signatures over longer genetic distances.
  • Self-fertilization leads to faster fixation of beneficial alleles.
  • Dominance can influence sweep patterns, particularly in outcrossing populations, depending on the origin of the beneficial variant.

Conclusions:

  • Self-fertilization and dominance significantly alter the patterns of selective sweeps.
  • Distinguishing between hard and soft sweeps is challenging due to these factors.
  • The study provides insights and proposes methods to better differentiate sweep scenarios in empirical data.