ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2017
Characterizing the roles of changing population size and selection on the evolution of flux control in metabolic pathways.
Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Understanding Functional Evolution in Orthologs and Paralogs.Journal of molecular evolution · 2025Review
- Fascination with RNA Editing: In the Lights of Evolution and Biology.Journal of molecular evolution · 2025Review
- PEMPS: a phylogenetic software tool to model the evolution of metabolic pathways.BMC bioinformatics · 2024Article
- Characterizing lineage-specific evolution and the processes driving genomic diversification in chordates.BMC evolutionary biology · 2020Article
- Metabolic Determinants of Enzyme Evolution in a Genome-Scale Bacterial Metabolic Network.Genome biology and evolution · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding the genotype-phenotype map is fundamental to our understanding of genomes. Genes do not function independently, but rather as part of networks or pathways. In the case of metabolic pathways, flux through the pathway is an important next layer of biological organization up from the individual gene or protein. Flux control in metabolic pathways, reflecting the importance of mutation to individual enzyme genes, may be evolutionarily variable due to the role of mutation-selection-drift balance. The evolutionary stability of rate limiting steps and the patterns of inter-molecular co-evolution were evaluated in a simulated pathway with a system out of equilibrium due to fluctuating selection, population size, or positive directional selection, to contrast with those under stabilizing selection.
resultsDepending upon the underlying population genetic regime, fluctuating population size was found to increase the evolutionary stability of rate limiting steps in some scenarios. This result was linked to patterns of local adaptation of the population. Further, during positive directional selection, as with more complex mutational scenarios, an increase in the observation of inter-molecular co-evolution was observed.
conclusionsDifferences in patterns of evolution when systems are in and out of equilibrium, including during positive directional selection may lead to predictable differences in observed patterns for divergent evolutionary scenarios. In particular, this result might be harnessed to detect differences between compensatory processes and directional processes at the pathway level based upon evolutionary observations in individual proteins. Detecting functional shifts in pathways reflects an important milestone in predicting when changes in genotypes result in changes in phenotypes.
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.