Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17989258›Full record

ArticleGenome research2007

Evolutionary rate analyses of orthologs and paralogs from 12 Drosophila genomes.

Andreas Heger, Chris P Ponting

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing 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

85 citing papers in PubMed, 138 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. DrosOMA: theF1000Research · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Apocrine secretion in the salivary glands ofFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

25 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andreas HegerDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3QX, United Kingdom. Andreas.Heger@dpag.ox.ac.uk
Chris P Ponting
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U137761446
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The newly sequenced genome sequences of 11 Drosophila species provide the first opportunity to investigate variations in evolutionary rates across a clade of closely related species. Protein-coding genes were predicted using established Drosophila melanogaster genes as templates, with recovery rates ranging from 81%-97% depending on species divergence and on genome assembly quality. Orthology and paralogy assignments were shown to be self-consistent among the different Drosophila species and to be consistent with regions of conserved gene order (synteny blocks). Next, we investigated the rates of diversification among these species' gene repertoires with respect to amino acid substitutions and to gene duplications. Constraints on amino acid sequences appear to have been most pronounced on D. ananassae and least pronounced on D. simulans and D. erecta terminal lineages. Codons predicted to have been subject to positive selection were found to be significantly over-represented among genes with roles in immune response and RNA metabolism, with the latter category including each subunit of the Dicer-2/r2d2 heterodimer. The vast majority of gene duplications (96.5%) and synteny rearrangements were found to occur, as expected, within single Müller elements. We show that the rate of ancient gene duplications was relatively uniform. However, gene duplications in terminal lineages are strongly skewed toward very recent events, consistent with either a rapid-birth and rapid-death model or the presence of large proportions of copy number variable genes in these Drosophila populations. Duplications were significantly more frequent among trypsin-like proteases and DM8 putative lipid-binding domain proteins.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenome, InsectSequence Homology, Nucleic AcidAnimalsConserved SequenceDrosophila melanogasterDrosophila ProteinsGenetic VariationSyntenyDrosophila Proteins

Identifiers

PMID17989258
PMCPMC2099592
OpenAlexW1992532041

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.