ArticleGenetics2012
Genetic basis of a violation of Dollo's Law: re-evolution of rotating sex combs in Drosophila bipectinata.
Article in Genetics, 2012. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Loss, persistence and reversal of phenotypic traits.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026Review
- Challenging and redefining Dollo's law of evolution: re-appearance of lost structures.BMC ecology and evolution · 2025Review
- Apothecial Ancestry, Evolution, and Re-Evolution inBiology · 2022Article
- Evidence for the loss and recovery of SLAMF9 during human evolution: implications on Dollo's law.Immunogenetics · 2021Article
- Repeated horizontal gene transfer of GALactose metabolism genes violates Dollo's law of irreversible loss.Genetics · 2021Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Phylogenetic analyses suggest that violations of "Dollo's law"--that is, re-evolution of lost complex structures--do occur, albeit infrequently. However, the genetic basis of such reversals has not been examined. Here, we address this question using the Drosophila sex comb, a recently evolved, male-specific morphological structure composed of modified bristles. In some species, sex comb development involves only the modification of individual bristles, while other species have more complex "rotated" sex combs that are shaped by coordinated migration of epithelial tissues. Rotated sex combs were lost in the ananassae species subgroup and subsequently re-evolved, ∼12 million years later, in Drosophila bipectinata and its sibling species. We examine the genetic basis of the differences in sex comb morphology between D. bipectinata and D. malerkotliana, a closely related species with a much simpler sex comb representing the ancestral condition. QTL mapping reveals that >50% of this difference is controlled by one chromosomal inversion that covers ∼5% of the genome. Several other, larger inversions do not contribute appreciably to the phenotype. This genetic architecture suggests that rotating sex combs may have re-evolved through changes in relatively few genes. We discuss potential developmental mechanisms that may allow lost complex structures to be regained.
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.