ArticleGenetics2016
Selection on Inversion Breakpoints Favors Proximity to Pairing Sensitive Sites in Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in Genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- The core-pivotal index: a geometry-first approach to academic impact.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Genome-wide diversity of chromosomal inversions and their disease relationships.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- The potential of inversions to accumulate balanced sexual antagonism is supported by simulations andeLife · 2025Article
- The Influence of Chromosomal Inversions on Genetic Variation and Clinal Patterns in Genomic Data of Drosophila melanogaster.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Consequences of partially recessive deleterious genetic variation for the evolution of inversions suppressing recombination between sex chromosomes1.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2024Article
- Locally adaptive inversions in structured populations.Genetics · 2024Article
- Consequences of partially recessive deleterious genetic variation for the evolution of inversions suppressing recombination between sex chromosomes.Evolution; international journal of organic evolution · 2022Article
- Inversion breakpoints and the evolution of supergenes.Molecular ecology · 2021Review
- Fine-Scale Position Effects Shape the Distribution of Inversion Breakpoints in Drosophila melanogaster.Genome biology and evolution · 2020Article
- The Cyclically SeasonalFrontiers in genetics · 2020Article
- Article
- How chromosomal rearrangements shape adaptation and speciation: Case studies in Drosophila pseudoobscura and its sibling species Drosophila persimilis.Molecular ecology · 2019Article
- Cluster expansion of apolipoprotein D (ApoD) genes in teleost fishes.BMC evolutionary biology · 2019Article
- Origin and Consequences of Chromosomal Inversions in the virilis Group of Drosophila.Genome biology and evolution · 2018Article
- Muller "Elements" inGenetics · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Chromosomal inversions are widespread among taxa, and have been implicated in a number of biological processes including adaptation, sex chromosome evolution, and segregation distortion. Consistent with selection favoring linkage between loci, it is well established that length is a selected trait of inversions. However, the factors that affect the distribution of inversion breakpoints remain poorly understood. "Sensitive sites" have been mapped on all euchromatic chromosome arms in Drosophila melanogaster, and may be a source of natural selection on inversion breakpoint positions. Briefly, sensitive sites are genomic regions wherein proximal structural rearrangements result in large reductions in local recombination rates in heterozygotes. Here, I show that breakpoints of common inversions are significantly more likely to lie within a cytological band containing a sensitive site than are breakpoints of rare inversions. Furthermore, common inversions for which neither breakpoint intersects a sensitive site are significantly longer than rare inversions, but common inversions whose breakpoints intersect a sensitive site show no evidence for increased length. I interpret these results to mean that selection favors inversions whose breakpoints disrupt synteny near to sensitive sites, possibly because these inversions suppress recombination in large genomic regions. To my knowledge this is the first evidence consistent with positive selection acting on inversion breakpoint positions.
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.