Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29048530›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2017

Population Genomic Analysis of a Pitviper Reveals Microevolutionary Forces Underlying Venom Chemistry.

Steven D Aird, Jigyasa Arora, Agneesh Barua, Lijun Qiu, Kouki Terada, Alexander S Mikheyev

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing 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

45 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

6 authors.

Steven D AirdEcology and Evolution Unit, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Kunigami-gun, Okinawa-ken, Japan.
Jigyasa AroraEcology and Evolution Unit, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Kunigami-gun, Okinawa-ken, Japan.
Agneesh BaruaEcology and Evolution Unit, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Kunigami-gun, Okinawa-ken, Japan.
Lijun QiuEcology and Evolution Unit, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Kunigami-gun, Okinawa-ken, Japan.
Kouki TeradaOkinawa Prefectural Institute of Health and the Environment, Biology and Ecology Group, Nanjo-shi, Okinawa, Japan.
Alexander S MikheyevEcology and Evolution Unit, Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology Graduate University, Kunigami-gun, Okinawa-ken, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Venoms are among the most biologically active secretions known, and are commonly believed to evolve under extreme positive selection. Many venom gene families, however, have undergone duplication, and are often deployed in doses vastly exceeding the LD50 for most prey species, which should reduce the strength of positive selection. Here, we contrast these selective regimes using snake venoms, which consist of rapidly evolving protein formulations. Though decades of extensive studies have found that snake venom proteins are subject to strong positive selection, the greater action of drift has been hypothesized, but never tested. Using a combination of de novo genome sequencing, population genomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics, we compare the two modes of evolution in the pitviper, Protobothrops mucrosquamatus. By partitioning selective constraints and adaptive evolution in a McDonald-Kreitman-type framework, we find support for both hypotheses: venom proteins indeed experience both stronger positive selection, and lower selective constraint than other genes in the genome. Furthermore, the strength of selection may be modulated by expression level, with more abundant proteins experiencing weaker selective constraint, leading to the accumulation of more deleterious mutations. These findings show that snake venoms evolve by a combination of adaptive and neutral mechanisms, both of which explain their extraordinarily high rates of molecular evolution. In addition to positive selection, which optimizes efficacy of the venom in the short term, relaxed selective constraints for deleterious mutations can lead to more rapid turnover of individual proteins, and potentially to exploration of a larger venom phenotypic space.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenomeAnimalsGenetic DriftSelection, GeneticViperidaeViper VenomsViper Venomsgenetic driftpitviperspopulation genomicsselectionvenom

Identifiers

PMID29048530
PMCPMC5737360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.