ArticleScience advances2015
Adaptive evolutionary paths from UV reception to sensing violet light by epistatic interactions.
Article in Science advances, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Discovering genotype-phenotype relationships with machine learning and the Visual Physiology Opsin Database (VPOD).GigaScience · 2024Article
- Selection, drift, and constraint in cypridinid luciferases and the diversification of bioluminescent signals in sea fireflies.Molecular ecology · 2021Article
- Origin and adaptation of green-sensitive (RH2) pigments in vertebrates.FEBS open bio · 2020Article
- High-order epistasis shapes evolutionary trajectories.PLoS computational biology · 2017Article
- Article
- A simple method for studying the molecular mechanisms of ultraviolet and violet reception in vertebrates.BMC evolutionary biology · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Ultraviolet (UV) reception is useful for such basic behaviors as mate choice, foraging, predator avoidance, communication, and navigation, whereas violet reception improves visual resolution and subtle contrast detection. UV and violet reception are mediated by the short wavelength-sensitive (SWS1) pigments that absorb light maximally (λmax) at ~360 nm and ~395 to 440 nm, respectively. Because of strong nonadditive (epistatic) interactions among amino acid changes in the pigments, the adaptive evolutionary mechanisms of these phenotypes are not well understood. Evolution of the violet pigment of the African clawed frog (Xenopus laevis, λmax = 423 nm) from the UV pigment in the amphibian ancestor (λmax = 359 nm) can be fully explained by eight mutations in transmembrane (TM) I-III segments. We show that epistatic interactions involving the remaining TM IV-VII segments provided evolutionary potential for the frog pigment to gradually achieve its violet-light reception by tuning its color sensitivity in small steps. Mutants in these segments also impair pigments that would cause drastic spectral shifts and thus eliminate them from viable evolutionary pathways. The overall effects of epistatic interactions involving TM IV-VII segments have disappeared at the last evolutionary step and thus are not detectable by studying present-day pigments. Therefore, characterizing the genotype-phenotype relationship during each evolutionary step is the key to uncover the true nature of epistasis.
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.