Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19197055›Full record

ReviewScience (New York, N.Y.)2009

Is genetic evolution predictable?

David L Stern, Virginie Orgogozo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Science (New York, N.Y.), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 264 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
264citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

264 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Deconstruction ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Bridging developmental and statistical approaches to variation and evolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Evolution of repressive sequences within an enhancer contributed to morphological diversity in crucifer plants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

204 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.

David L SternDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA. dstern@princeton.edu
Virginie Orgogozo

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ever since the integration of Mendelian genetics into evolutionary biology in the early 20th century, evolutionary geneticists have for the most part treated genes and mutations as generic entities. However, recent observations indicate that all genes are not equal in the eyes of evolution. Evolutionarily relevant mutations tend to accumulate in hotspot genes and at specific positions within genes. Genetic evolution is constrained by gene function, the structure of genetic networks, and population biology. The genetic basis of evolution may be predictable to some extent, and further understanding of this predictability requires incorporation of the specific functions and characteristics of genes into evolutionary theory.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionEvolution, MolecularGenesMutationAnimalsArabidopsisDrosophilaEpistasis, GeneticGene Regulatory NetworksGenetic SpeciationGenetic VariationPhenotypePlantsPopulation DynamicsSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID19197055
PMCPMC3184636

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.