Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23183893›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2012

Molecular evolution of teleost neural isozymes.

Ryan R Auld, Joseph M Quattro, Thomas J S Merritt

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 93% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ryan R AuldDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON, P3E 2C6, Canada.
Joseph M Quattro
Thomas J S Merritt
Laurentian University · CAUniversity of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Isozymes, homologous enzymes coded by separate loci within a genome, present interesting systems for examining molecular and functional divergence through natural selection. Isozyme pairs for a number of metabolic enzymes, including Triosephosphate isomerase (Tpi), Malate dehydrogenase (Mdh), Phosphoglucose isomerase (Pgi), and Guanylate kinase (Guk), appear to all result from a single, large duplication event early in teleost evolution. These small gene families include two forms, a generally expressed form with no apparent charge and a neurally expressed form with a pronounced negative charge although the canalization of expression of the second form varies across families. Using ancestral sequence reconstructions and standard comparisons of rates of nonsynonymous and synonymous change, combined with the examination of the specific amino acid changes observed and predicted we examined the evolution of the Tpi and Guk families using all available vertebrate sequences and all four families using a smaller, common, dataset. We find that post-duplication, the neural Tpi and Guk isozymes evolved through similar periods of positive selection as evidenced by elevated rates of nonsynonymous change and accumulation of negative amino acids. Over the same evolutionary period our analysis suggests that Mdh and Pgi isozymes appear to have evolved under a less divergent pattern of selection. These distinct results likely reflect functional differences between the isozymes, possibly a result of differences in expression patterns.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularAmino Acid SequenceAnimalsFishesGuanylate KinasesIsoenzymesMolecular Sequence DataPhylogenySelection, GeneticSequence AlignmentTriose-Phosphate IsomeraseGuanylate KinasesIsoenzymesTriose-Phosphate Isomerase

Identifiers

PMID23183893
OpenAlexW2005334137

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.