ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2007
Selective pressures on Drosophila chemosensory receptor genes.
Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genome-wide identification and characterization of the chemosensory relative protein genes in Rhus gall aphid Schlechtendalia chinensis.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- Genome-wide identification and expression profiling of odorant receptor genes in the malaria vector Anopheles sinensis.Parasites & vectors · 2022Article
- The Evolutionary Dynamics of the Odorant Receptor Gene Family in Corbiculate Bees.Genome biology and evolution · 2017Article
- Odorant Receptors of the New Zealand Endemic Leafroller Moth Species Planotortrix octo and P. excessana.PloS one · 2016Article
- Rapid evolution of chemosensory receptor genes in a pair of sibling species of orchid bees (Apidae: Euglossini).BMC evolutionary biology · 2015Article
- Pheromone receptor evolution in the cryptic leafroller species, Ctenopseustis obliquana and C. herana.Journal of molecular evolution · 2015Article
- Functional evolution of a multigene family: orthologous and paralogous pheromone receptor genes in the turnip moth, Agrotis segetum.PloS one · 2013Article
- Genome-wide patterns of natural variation reveal strong selective sweeps and ongoing genomic conflict in Drosophila mauritiana.Genome research · 2013Article
- Sequence comparisons of odorant receptors among tortricid moths reveal different rates of molecular evolution among family members.PloS one · 2012Article
- Evolutionary Genomics of Genes Involved in Olfactory Behavior in the Drosophila melanogaster Species Group.Evolutionary bioinformatics online · 2012Article
- Antennal transcriptome of Manduca sexta.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2011Article
- Functional and molecular evolution of olfactory neurons and receptors for aliphatic esters across the Drosophila genus.Journal of comparative physiology. A, Neuroethology, sensory, neural, and behavioral physiology · 2010Article
- The insect chemoreceptor superfamily in Drosophila pseudoobscura: molecular evolution of ecologically-relevant genes over 25 million years.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2009Article
- Odor detection in insects: volatile codes.Journal of chemical ecology · 2008Review
- Evolution of gene expression in the Drosophila olfactory system.Molecular biology and evolution · 2008Article
- Five Drosophila genomes reveal nonneutral evolution and the signature of host specialization in the chemoreceptor superfamily.Genetics · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The evolution and patterns of selection of genes encoding 10 Drosophila odorant receptors (Or) and the sex pheromone receptor Gr68a were investigated by comparing orthologous sequences across five to eight ecologically diverse species of Drosophila. Using maximum likelihood estimates of dN/dS ratios we show that all 11 genes sampled are under purifying selection, indicating functional constraint. Four of these genes (Or33c, Or42a, Or85e, and Gr68a) may be under positive selection, and if so, there is good evidence that 12 specific amino acid sites may be under positive selection. All of these sites are predicted to be located either in loop regions or just inside membrane spanning regions, and interestingly one of the two sites in Gr68a is in a similar position to a previously described polymorphism in Gr5a that causes a shift in sensitivity to its ligand trehalose. For three Ors, possible evidence for positive selection was detected along a lineage. These include Or22a in the lineage leading to D. mauritiana and Or22b in the lineage leading to D. simulans. This is of interest in light of previous data showing a change in ligand response profile for these species in the sensory neuron (ab3A) which expresses both Or22a and Or22b in D. melanogaster. In summary, while the main chemosensory function and/or structural integrity of these 10 Or genes and Gr68a are evolutionarily preserved, positive selection appears to be acting on some of these genes, at specific sites and along certain lineages, and provides testable hypotheses for further functional experimentation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17541681What 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.