Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25737491›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2015

Nonadaptive Amino Acid Convergence Rates Decrease over Time.

Richard A Goldstein, Stephen T Pollard, Seena D Shah, David D Pollock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing 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

43 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Adaptive molecular convergence is pervasive across deep time and largely decoupled from phenotypic convergence.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. The genetic foundations of convergent traits.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Genes and sites under adaptation at the phylogenetic scale also exhibit adaptation at the population-genetic scale.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Genomic basis of parallel adaptation varies with divergence inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

4 authors.

Richard A GoldsteinDivision of Infection & Immunity, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Stephen T PollardDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora.
Seena D ShahDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora.
David D PollockDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Aurora david.pollock@ucdenver.edu.

Funding

Modeling evolution of functional context in proteinsR01GM083127 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI POLLOCK, DAVID D · 2009 to 2019
$2.7M
Genome-wide mutation models to decipher functionR01GM097251 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI POLLOCK, DAVID D · 2012 to 2015
$1.2M
Medical Research Council MC_PC_13056Medical Research Council MC_U117573805NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM083127NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM083127NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM097251
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Convergence is a central concept in evolutionary studies because it provides strong evidence for adaptation. It also provides information about the nature of the fitness landscape and the repeatability of evolution, and can mislead phylogenetic inference. To understand the role of adaptive convergence, we need to understand the patterns of nonadaptive convergence. Here, we consider the relationship between nonadaptive convergence and divergence in mitochondrial and model proteins. Surprisingly, nonadaptive convergence is much more common than expected in closely related organisms, falling off as organisms diverge. The extent of the convergent drop-off in mitochondrial proteins is well predicted by epistatic or coevolutionary effects in our "evolutionary Stokes shift" models and poorly predicted by conventional evolutionary models. Convergence probabilities decrease dramatically if the ancestral amino acids of branches being compared have diverged, but also drop slowly over evolutionary time even if the ancestral amino acids have not substituted. Convergence probabilities drop-off rapidly for quickly evolving sites, but much more slowly for slowly evolving sites. Furthermore, once sites have diverged their convergence probabilities are extremely low and indistinguishable from convergence levels at randomized sites. These results indicate that we cannot assume that excessive convergence early on is necessarily adaptive. This new understanding should help us to better discriminate adaptive from nonadaptive convergence and develop more relevant evolutionary models with improved validity for phylogenetic inference.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularAdaptation, PhysiologicalAmino AcidsAnimalsGenome, MitochondrialMitochondrial ProteinsModels, GeneticPhylogenyVertebratesAmino AcidsMitochondrial Proteinsadaptationamino acid propensitiescoevolutionconvergenceepistasisepistatic interactionsevolutionary processmolecular evolutionphylogeneticsselectionStokes–Fisher modelStokes shiftthermodynamics

Identifiers

PMID25737491
PMCPMC4572784

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.