ArticleGenome research2001
How malleable is the eukaryotic genome? Extreme rate of chromosomal rearrangement in the genus Drosophila.
Article in Genome research, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
80 citing papers in PubMed, 178 citations in OpenAlex.
- Draft hybrid assembly and annotation of the Drosophila palustris and Drosophila subpalustris genomes.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- Emergence and evolution of protein-coding de novo genes.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026Review
- De Novo Gene Emergence: Summary, Classification, and Challenges of Current Methods.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Review
- De Novo Emerged Gene Search in Eukaryotes with DENSE.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Article
- Ribosomal Protein Cluster Organization in Asgard Archaea.Archaea (Vancouver, B.C.) · 2023Article
- Article
- Article
- High-quality chromosome-level genome assembly and full-length transcriptome analysis of the pharaoh ant Monomorium pharaonis.GigaScience · 2020Article
- The evolution of insect metallothioneins.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2020Article
- De novo gene birth.PLoS genetics · 2019Article
- Muller "Elements" inGenetics · 2018Article
- Comparative genomics and the nature of placozoan species.PLoS biology · 2018Article
- Intrinsic adaptive value and early fate of gene duplication revealed by a bottom-up approach.eLife · 2018Article
- Genomics of parallel adaptation at two timescales in Drosophila.PLoS genetics · 2017Article
- Evolutionary origin and function of NOX4-art, an arthropod specific NADPH oxidase.BMC evolutionary biology · 2017Article
- Comparative Genomic Analyses Provide New Insights into the Evolutionary Dynamics of Heterochromatin in Drosophila.PLoS genetics · 2016Article
- Rapid evolutionary turnover underlies conserved lncRNA-genome interactions.Genes & development · 2016Article
- Reassignment of Drosophila willistoni Genome Scaffolds to Chromosome II Arms.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2015Article
- Article
- Genome analysis of a major urban malaria vector mosquito, Anopheles stephensi.Genome biology · 2014Article
20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the evolution of the genus Drosophila, the molecular organization of the major chromosomal elements has been repeatedly rearranged via the fixation of paracentric inversions. Little detailed information is available, however, on the extent and effect of these changes at the molecular level. In principle, a full description of the rate and pattern of change could reveal the limits, if any, to which the eukaryotic genome can accommodate reorganizations. We have constructed a high-density physical map of the largest chromosomal element in Drosophila repleta (chromosome 2) and compared the order and distances between the markers with those on the homologous chromosomal element (3R) in Drosophila melanogaster. The two species belong to different subgenera (Drosophila and Sophophora, respectively), which diverged 40-62 million years (Myr) ago and represent, thus, the farthest lineages within the Drosophila genus. The comparison reveals extensive reshuffling of gene order from centromere to telomere. Using a maximum likelihood method, we estimate that 114 +/- 14 paracentric inversions have been fixed in this chromosomal element since the divergence of the two species, that is, 0.9-1.4 inversions fixed per Myr. Comparison with available rates of chromosomal evolution, taking into account genome size, indicates that the Drosophila genome shows the highest rate found so far in any eukaryote. Twenty-one small segments (23-599 kb) comprising at least two independent (nonoverlapping) markers appear to be conserved between D. melanogaster and D. repleta. These results are consistent with the random breakage model and do not provide significant evidence of functional constraint of any kind. They support the notion that the Drosophila genome is extraordinarily malleable and has a modular organization. The high rate of chromosomal change also suggests a very limited transferability of the positional information from the Drosophila genome to other insects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.