ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2013
Two rapidly evolving genes contribute to male fitness in Drosophila.
Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Lost and Found: Unraveling the Functions of Orphan Genes.Journal of developmental biology · 2023Review
- ORFanID: A web-based search engine for the discovery and identification of orphan and taxonomically restricted genes.PloS one · 2023Article
- Human protein-RNA interaction network is highly stable across mammals.BMC genomics · 2019Article
- Ribosome profiling reveals the what, when, where and how of protein synthesis.Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology · 2015Review
- Cross-Species Interaction between Rapidly Evolving Telomere-Specific Drosophila Proteins.PloS one · 2015Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Purifying selection often results in conservation of gene sequence and function. The most functionally conserved genes are also thought to be among the most biologically essential. These observations have led to the use of sequence conservation as a proxy for functional conservation. Here we describe two genes that are exceptions to this pattern. We show that lack of sequence conservation among orthologs of CG15460 and CG15323-herein named jean-baptiste (jb) and karr, respectively-does not necessarily predict lack of functional conservation. These two Drosophila melanogaster genes are among the most rapidly evolving protein-coding genes in this species, being nearly as diverged from their D. yakuba orthologs as random sequences are. jb and karr are both expressed at an elevated level in larval males and adult testes, but they are not accessory gland proteins and their loss does not affect male fertility. Instead, knockdown of these genes in D. melanogaster via RNA interference caused male-biased viability defects. These viability effects occur prior to the third instar for jb and during late pupation for karr. We show that putative orthologs to jb and karr are also expressed strongly in the testes of other Drosophila species and have similar gene structure across species despite low levels of sequence conservation. While standard molecular evolution tests could not reject neutrality, other data hint at a role for natural selection. Together these data provide a clear case where a lack of sequence conservation does not imply a lack of conservation of expression or function.
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.