Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11139510›Full record

ArticleGenetics2001

Substitution rates in Drosophila nuclear genes: implications for translational selection.

K A Dunn, J P Bielawski, Z Yang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

K A DunnDepartment of Biology, Galton Laboratory, University College, London NW1 2HE, United Kingdom. katherine.dunn@ucl.ac.uk
J P Bielawski
Z Yang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relationships between synonymous and nonsynonymous substitution rates and between synonymous rate and codon usage bias are important to our understanding of the roles of mutation and selection in the evolution of Drosophila genes. Previous studies used approximate estimation methods that ignore codon bias. In this study we reexamine those relationships using maximum-likelihood methods to estimate substitution rates, which accommodate the transition/transversion rate bias and codon usage bias. We compiled a sample of homologous DNA sequences at 83 nuclear loci from Drosophila melanogaster and at least one other species of Drosophila. Our analysis was consistent with previous studies in finding that synonymous rates were positively correlated with nonsynonymous rates. Our analysis differed from previous studies, however, in that synonymous rates were unrelated to codon bias. We therefore conducted a simulation study to investigate the differences between approaches. The results suggested that failure to properly account for multiple substitutions at the same site and for biased codon usage by approximate methods can lead to an artifactual correlation between synonymous rate and codon bias. Implications of the results for translational selection are discussed.

Indexed as

Genes, InsectAnimalsCell NucleusCodonComputer SimulationDrosophilaDrosophila melanogasterLikelihood FunctionsModels, GeneticMutationProtein BiosynthesisSelection, GeneticCodon

Identifiers

PMID11139510
PMCPMC1461466

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.