Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24788553›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Laboratory selection quickly erases historical differentiation.

Inês Fragata, Pedro Simões, Miguel Lopes-Cunha, Margarida Lima, Bárbara Kellen, Margarida Bárbaro, Josiane Santos, Michael R Rose, Mauro Santos, Margarida Matos

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. How predictable is adaptation from standing genetic variation? Experimental evolution inPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2023
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Genomics of Parallel Experimental Evolution in Drosophila.Molecular biology and evolution · 2017
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

10 authors.

Inês FragataCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Pedro SimõesCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Miguel Lopes-CunhaCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Margarida LimaCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Bárbara KellenCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Margarida BárbaroCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Josiane SantosCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.
Michael R RoseDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of California Irvine, Irvine, California, United States of America.
Mauro SantosDepartament de Genètica i de Microbiologia, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain.
Margarida MatosCentro de Biologia Ambiental and Departamento de Biologia Animal, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The roles of history, chance and selection have long been debated in evolutionary biology. Though uniform selection is expected to lead to convergent evolution between populations, contrasting histories and chance events might prevent them from attaining the same adaptive state, rendering evolution somewhat unpredictable. The predictability of evolution has been supported by several studies documenting repeatable adaptive radiations and convergence in both nature and laboratory. However, other studies suggest divergence among populations adapting to the same environment. Despite the relevance of this issue, empirical data is lacking for real-time adaptation of sexual populations with deeply divergent histories and ample standing genetic variation across fitness-related traits. Here we analyse the real-time evolutionary dynamics of Drosophila subobscura populations, previously differentiated along the European cline, when colonizing a new common environment. By analysing several life-history, physiological and morphological traits, we show that populations quickly converge to the same adaptive state through different evolutionary paths. In contrast with other studies, all analysed traits fully converged regardless of their association with fitness. Selection was able to erase the signature of history in highly differentiated populations after just a short number of generations, leading to consistent patterns of convergent evolution.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularSelection, GeneticAdaptation, PhysiologicalAlgorithmsAnimalsDrosophilaEnvironmentEuropeFemaleFertilityFounder EffectGenetic FitnessGeographyLaboratoriesMaleModels, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID24788553
PMCPMC4008540

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.