Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28652353›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2017

Disentangling the effects of selection and loss bias on gene dynamics.

Jaime Iranzo, José A Cuesta, Susanna Manrubia, Mikhail I Katsnelson, Eugene V Koonin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A generative model for bipartite gene-sharing networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. The fitness connection of antibiotic resistance.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  12. The population genetics of prokaryotic pangenomes.Nature ecology & evolution · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Selfish, promiscuous and sometimes useful: how mobile genetic elements drive horizontal gene transfer in microbial populations.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Thermodynamics of evolution and the origin of life.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  18. Toward a theory of evolution as multilevel learning.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jaime IranzoNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894.
José A CuestaGrupo Interdisciplinar de Sistemas Complejos, Departamento de Matemáticas, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, 28911 Leganés (Madrid), Spain.ORCID 0000-0001-9890-9367
Susanna ManrubiaGrupo Interdisciplinar de Sistemas Complejos, National Biotechnology Centre, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, 28049 Madrid, Spain.
Mikhail I KatsnelsonInstitute for Molecules and Materials, Radboud University, Nijmegen 6525AJ, The Netherlands.
Eugene V KooninNational Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20894; koonin@ncbi.nlm.nih.gov.ORCID 0000-0003-3943-8299

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We combine mathematical modeling of genome evolution with comparative analysis of prokaryotic genomes to estimate the relative contributions of selection and intrinsic loss bias to the evolution of different functional classes of genes and mobile genetic elements (MGE). An exact solution for the dynamics of gene family size was obtained under a linear duplication-transfer-loss model with selection. With the exception of genes involved in information processing, particularly translation, which are maintained by strong selection, the average selection coefficient for most nonparasitic genes is low albeit positive, compatible with observed positive correlation between genome size and effective population size. Free-living microbes evolve under stronger selection for gene retention than parasites. Different classes of MGE show a broad range of fitness effects, from the nearly neutral transposons to prophages, which are actively eliminated by selection. Genes involved in antiparasite defense, on average, incur a fitness cost to the host that is at least as high as the cost of plasmids. This cost is probably due to the adverse effects of autoimmunity and curtailment of horizontal gene transfer caused by the defense systems and selfish behavior of some of these systems, such as toxin-antitoxin and restriction modification modules. Transposons follow a biphasic dynamics, with bursts of gene proliferation followed by decay in the copy number that is quantitatively captured by the model. The horizontal gene transfer to loss ratio, but not duplication to loss ratio, correlates with genome size, potentially explaining increased abundance of neutral and costly elements in larger genomes.

Indexed as

Gene Expression RegulationGene Transfer, HorizontalSelection, GeneticComputational BiologyComputer SimulationDNA Transposable ElementsEvolution, MolecularGene DosageGenome, ArchaealGenome, BacterialGenomicsHost-Parasite InteractionsModels, TheoreticalMutationParasitic DiseasesDNA Transposable Elementsantiparasite defensegene losshorizontal gene transfermobile genetic elementsselection

Identifiers

PMID28652353
PMCPMC5514749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.