ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2011
Osvaldo and Isis retrotransposons as markers of the Drosophila buzzatii colonisation in Australia.
Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2011. 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.
- Variation in mutation, recombination, and transposition rates inGenome research · 2023Article
- The Worldwide Invasion of Drosophila suzukii Is Accompanied by a Large Increase of Transposable Element Load and a Small Number of Putatively Adaptive Insertions.Molecular biology and evolution · 2021Article
- Resolving the genetic paradox of invasions: Preadapted genomes and postintroduction hybridization of bigheaded carps in the Mississippi River Basin.Evolutionary applications · 2020Article
- Transposable elements inMobile DNA · 2020Review
- Genome-wide analysis of intraspecific transposon diversity in yeast.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTransposable elements (TEs) constitute an important source of genetic variability owing to their jumping and regulatory properties, and are considered to drive species evolution. Several factors that are able to induce TE transposition in genomes have been documented (for example environmental stress and inter- and intra-specific crosses) but in many instances the reasons for TE mobilisation have yet to be elucidated. Colonising populations constitute an ideal model for studying TE behaviour and distribution as they are exposed to different environmental and new demographic conditions. In this study, the distribution of two TEs, Osvaldo and Isis, was examined in two colonising populations of D. buzzatii from Australia. Comparing Osvaldo copy numbers between Australian and Old World (reported in previous studies) colonisations provides a valuable tool for elucidating the colonisation process and the effect of new conditions encountered by colonisers on TEs.
resultsThe chromosomal distributions of Osvaldo and Isis retrotransposons in two colonising populations of D. buzzatii from Australia revealed sites of high insertion frequency (>10%) and low frequency sites. Comparisons between Osvaldo insertion profiles in colonising populations from the Old World and Australia demonstrate a tendency towards a higher number of highly occupied sites with higher insertion frequency in the Old World than in Australian populations. Tests concerning selection against deleterious TE insertions indicate that Isis is more controlled by purifying selection than Osvaldo. The distribution of both elements on chromosomal arms follows a Poisson distribution and there are non-significant positive correlations between highly occupied sites and chromosomal inversions.
conclusionsThe occupancy profile of Osvaldo and Isis retrotransposons is characterised by the existence of high and low insertion frequency sites in the populations. These results demonstrate that Australian D. buzzatii populations were subjected to a founder effect during the colonisation process. Moreover, there are more sites with high insertion frequency in the Old World colonisation than in the Australian colonisation, indicating a probable stronger bottleneck effect in Australia. The results suggest that selection does not seem to play a major role, compared to demography, in the distribution of transposable elements in the Australian populations.
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.