ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2007
Adaptations to fluctuating selection in Drosophila.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 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
37 citing papers in PubMed.
- Models of Fluctuating Selection Between Generations: A Solution for the Theoretical Inconsistency.Journal of molecular evolution · 2024Article
- The network structure affects the fixation probability when it couples to the birth-death dynamics in finite population.PLoS computational biology · 2021Article
- Senescence and entrenchment in evolution of amino acid sites.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Article
- SELVa: Simulator of evolution with landscape variation.PloS one · 2020Article
- Article
- Parallel Evolution of Metazoan Mitochondrial Proteins.Genome biology and evolution · 2017Article
- Article
- The Impact of Environmental Fluctuations on Evolutionary Fitness Functions.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- Changing preferences: deformation of single position amino acid fitness landscapes and evolution of proteins.Biology letters · 2015Review
- Fate of a mutation in a fluctuating environment.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015Article
- The evolutionarily stable distribution of fitness effects.Genetics · 2015Article
- Differential strengths of positive selection revealed by hitchhiking effects at small physical scales in Drosophila melanogaster.Molecular biology and evolution · 2014Article
- A predictive fitness model for influenza.Nature · 2014Article
- Random fluctuation of selection coefficients and the extent of nucleotide variation in human populations.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2013Article
- Molecular hyperdiversity and evolution in very large populations.Molecular ecology · 2013Article
- Fitness conferred by replaced amino acids declines with time.Biology letters · 2012Article
- Clonal interference in the evolution of influenza.Genetics · 2012Article
- Quantifying selection acting on a complex trait using allele frequency time series data.Molecular biology and evolution · 2012Article
- Emergent neutrality in adaptive asexual evolution.Genetics · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Time-dependent selection causes the adaptive evolution of new phenotypes, and this dynamics can be traced in genomic data. We have analyzed polymorphisms and substitutions in Drosophila, using a more sensitive inference method for adaptations than the standard population-genetic tests. We find evidence that selection itself is strongly time-dependent, with changes occurring at nearly the rate of neutral evolution. At the same time, higher than previously estimated levels of selection make adaptive responses by a factor 10-100 faster than the pace of selection changes, ensuring that adaptations are an efficient mode of evolution under time-dependent selection. The rate of selection changes is faster in noncoding DNA, i.e., the inference of functional elements can less be based on sequence conservation than for proteins. Our results suggest that selection acts not only as a constraint but as a major driving force of genomic change.
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.