ArticleBMC genomics2015
Snake venoms are integrated systems, but abundant venom proteins evolve more rapidly.
Article in BMC genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 84 citations in OpenAlex.
- Venom Variation as a Window into the Ecology and Evolution of Snakes.Integrative and comparative biology · 2026Review
- Transcriptomic Insights Into the Evolution of Snake Venom: Mechanisms, Diversity, and Adaptation.Scientifica · 2026Review
- Molecular Mechanisms of Venom Diversity.Toxins · 2025Review
- Unveiling the Evolutionary History of European Vipers and Their Venoms From a Multi-Omic Approach.Molecular ecology · 2025Article
- Make Acetylcholine Great Again! Australian Skinks Evolved Multiple Neurotoxin-Proof Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors in Defiance of Snake Venom.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Review
- A Russian Doll of Resistance: Nested Gains and Losses of Venom Immunity in Varanid Lizards.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Sequence Divergence in Venom Genes Within and Between Montane Pitviper (Viperidae: Crotalinae: Cerrophidion) Species is Driven by Mutation-Drift Equilibrium.Journal of molecular evolution · 2023Article
- Article
- Diversity Begets Diversity When Diet Drives Snake Venom Evolution, but Evenness Rather Than Richness Is What Counts.Toxins · 2023Article
- Genome assembly and annotation of the Brown-Spotted Pit viperGigaByte (Hong Kong, China) · 2023Article
- Review
- Article
- De Novo Genome Assembly Highlights the Role of Lineage-Specific Gene Duplications in the Evolution of Venom in Fea's Viper (Azemiops feae).Genome biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Hybridization betweenBiology · 2022Article
- Article
- Venom Gene Sequence Diversity and Expression Jointly Shape Diet Adaptation in Pitvipers.Molecular biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Proteo-Transcriptomic Characterization ofToxins · 2021Article
- Venom-gland transcriptomic, venomic, and antivenomic profiles of the spine-bellied sea snake (Hydrophis curtus) from the South China Sea.BMC genomics · 2021Article
- An ancient, conserved gene regulatory network led to the rise of oral venom systems.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021Article
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 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile many studies have shown that extracellular proteins evolve rapidly, how selection acts on them remains poorly understood. We used snake venoms to understand the interaction between ecology, expression level, and evolutionary rate in secreted protein systems. Venomous snakes employ well-integrated systems of proteins and organic constituents to immobilize prey. Venoms are generally optimized to subdue preferred prey more effectively than non-prey, and many venom protein families manifest positive selection and rapid gene family diversification. Although previous studies have illuminated how individual venom protein families evolve, how selection acts on venoms as integrated systems, is unknown.
resultsUsing next-generation transcriptome sequencing and mass spectrometry, we examined microevolution in two pitvipers, allopatrically separated for at least 1.6 million years, and their hybrids. Transcriptomes of parental species had generally similar compositions in regard to protein families, but for a given protein family, the homologs present and concentrations thereof sometimes differed dramatically. For instance, a phospholipase A2 transcript comprising 73.4 % of the Protobothrops elegans transcriptome, was barely present in the P. flavoviridis transcriptome (<0.05 %). Hybrids produced most proteins found in both parental venoms. Protein evolutionary rates were positively correlated with transcriptomic and proteomic abundances, and the most abundant proteins showed positive selection. This pattern holds with the addition of four other published crotaline transcriptomes, from two more genera, and also for the recently published king cobra genome, suggesting that rapid evolution of abundant proteins may be generally true for snake venoms. Looking more broadly at Protobothrops, we show that rapid evolution of the most abundant components is due to positive selection, suggesting an interplay between abundance and adaptation.
conclusionsGiven log-scale differences in toxin abundance, which are likely correlated with biosynthetic costs, we hypothesize that as a result of natural selection, snakes optimize return on energetic investment by producing more of venom proteins that increase their fitness. Natural selection then acts on the additive genetic variance of these components, in proportion to their contributions to overall fitness. Adaptive evolution of venoms may occur most rapidly through changes in expression levels that alter fitness contributions, and thus the strength of selection acting on specific secretome components.
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.