ArticlePLoS genetics2009
Pervasive natural selection in the Drosophila genome?
Article in PLoS genetics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 211 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
211 citing papers in PubMed.
- A population genomic resource for Drosophila pseudoobscura.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- What has population genomics told us about the dynamics of selection and plant adaptation?Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Review
- Epistasis among clustered lineage-specific amino acid substitutions in the Drosophila Trio protein.PLoS genetics · 2026Article
- The impact of non-neutral synonymous mutations when inferring selection on nonsynonymous mutations.Genetics · 2025Article
- Article
- Recombination Rate and Recurrent Linked Selection Shape Correlated Genomic Landscapes Across a Continuum of Divergence in Swallows.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
- Epistasis among clustered lineage-specific adaptive amino acid substitutions in the Drosophila Trio protein.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Population Genomic Scans for Natural Selection and Demography.Annual review of genetics · 2024Review
- Causes and consequences of a complex recombinational landscape in the antGenome research · 2024Article
- Population genetic simulation: Benchmarking frameworks for non-standard models of natural selection.Molecular ecology resources · 2024Article
- The contribution of gene flow, selection, and genetic drift to five thousand years of human allele frequency change.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Accurate inference of population history in the presence of background selection.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- The contribution of gene flow, selection, and genetic drift to five thousand years of human allele frequency change.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Article
- Selection and geography shape male reproductive tract transcriptomes in Drosophila melanogaster.Genetics · 2023Article
- Article
- Strong, Recent Selective Sweeps Reshape Genetic Diversity in Freshwater Bivalve Megalonaias nervosa.Molecular biology and evolution · 2023Article
- Meiotic, genomic and evolutionary properties of crossover distribution in Drosophila yakuba.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
151 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
Abstract
Over the past four decades, the predominant view of molecular evolution saw little connection between natural selection and genome evolution, assuming that the functionally constrained fraction of the genome is relatively small and that adaptation is sufficiently infrequent to play little role in shaping patterns of variation within and even between species. Recent evidence from Drosophila, reviewed here, suggests that this view may be invalid. Analyses of genetic variation within and between species reveal that much of the Drosophila genome is under purifying selection, and thus of functional importance, and that a large fraction of coding and noncoding differences between species are adaptive. The findings further indicate that, in Drosophila, adaptations may be both common and strong enough that the fate of neutral mutations depends on their chance linkage to adaptive mutations as much as on the vagaries of genetic drift. The emerging evidence has implications for a wide variety of fields, from conservation genetics to bioinformatics, and presents challenges to modelers and experimentalists alike.
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.