ArticleGenetica2009
Sequence signatures of a recent chromosomal rearrangement in Drosophila mojavensis.
Article in Genetica, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genome Evolution in Three Species of Cactophilic Drosophila.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2016Article
- Genome-wide tests for introgression between cactophilic Drosophila implicate a role of inversions during speciation.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2015Article
- Gene alterations at Drosophila inversion breakpoints provide prima facie evidence for natural selection as an explanation for rapid chromosomal evolution.BMC genomics · 2012Article
- Mitotic and polytene chromosomes analysis of the oriental fruit fly, Bactrocera dorsalis (Hendel) (Diptera: Tephritidae).Genetica · 2011Article
- The transposon Galileo generates natural chromosomal inversions in Drosophila by ectopic recombination.PloS one · 2009Article
- Cloning and sequencing of the breakpoint regions of inversion 5g fixed in Drosophila buzzatii.Chromosoma · 2009Article
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
Abstract
The X-chromosome inversion, Xe, distinguishes Drosophila mojavensis and D. arizonae. Earlier work mapped the breakpoints of this inversion to large intervals and provided hypotheses for the locations of the breakpoints within 3000-bp intergenic regions on the D. mojavensis genome sequence assembly. Here, we sequenced these regions directly in the putatively ancestral D. arizonae X-chromosome. We find that the two inversion breakpoints are near an inverted gene duplication and a common repetitive element, respectively, and these features were likely present in the non-inverted ancestral chromosome on the D. mojavensis lineage. Contrary to an earlier hypothesis, the inverted gene duplication appears to predate the inversion. We find no sequence similarity between the breakpoint regions in the D. mojavensis ancestor, excluding an ectopic-exchange model of chromosome rearrangements. We also found no evidence that staggered single-strand breaks caused the inversion. We suggest these features may have contributed to the chromosomal breakages resulting in this inversion.
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.