ArticleGenome biology and evolution2015
Molecular Evolution of Drosophila Germline Stem Cell and Neural Stem Cell Regulating Genes.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative functional and evolutionary analysis of essential germline stem cell genes across the genus Drosophila and two outgroup species.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Article
- Higher-order epistasis shapes natural variation in germ stem cell niche activity.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Functional Divergence of the bag-of-marbles Gene in the Drosophila melanogaster Species Group.Molecular biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Molecular population genetics of Sex-lethal (Sxl) in the Drosophila melanogaster species group: a locus that genetically interacts with Wolbachia pipientis in Drosophila melanogaster.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Article
- Contrasting patterns of molecular evolution in metazoan germ line genes.BMC evolutionary biology · 2019Article
- RNA-Interference Pathways Display High Rates of Adaptive Protein Evolution in Multiple Invertebrates.Genetics · 2018Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Here, we study the molecular evolution of a near complete set of genes that had functional evidence in the regulation of the Drosophila germline and neural stem cell. Some of these genes have previously been shown to be rapidly evolving by positive selection raising the possibility that stem cell genes as a group have elevated signatures of positive selection. Using recent Drosophila comparative genome sequences and population genomic sequences of Drosophila melanogaster, we have investigated both long- and short-term evolution occurring across these two different stem cell systems, and compared them with a carefully chosen random set of genes to represent the background rate of evolution. Our results showed an excess of genes with evidence of a recent selective sweep in both germline and neural stem cells in D. melanogaster. However compared with their control genes, both stem cell systems had no significant excess of genes with long-term recurrent positive selection in D. melanogaster, or across orthologous sequences from the melanogaster group. The evidence of long-term positive selection was limited to a subset of genes with specific functions in both the germline and neural stem cell system.
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.