ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2018
Faster Evolving Primate Genes Are More Likely to Duplicate.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 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
24 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- De Novo Gene Emergence: Summary, Classification, and Challenges of Current Methods.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Review
- Cell Compartment is a Predictor of Protein Rate of Evolution, but not in the Manner Expected: Evidence Against the Extended Complexity Hypothesis.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Orphan genes are not a distinct biological entity.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Paralog dispensability shapes homozygous deletion patterns in tumor genomes.Molecular systems biology · 2023Article
- Ohnologs and SSD Paralogs Differ in Genomic and Expression Features Related to Dosage Constraints.Genome biology and evolution · 2023Article
- Comparative Analysis Reveals Different Evolutionary Fates and Biological Functions in Wheat Duplicated Genes (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Characterization of large-scale genomic differences in the first complete human genome.Genome biology · 2023Article
- The Lost and Found: Unraveling the Functions of Orphan Genes.Journal of developmental biology · 2023Review
- Population genomics reveals mechanisms and dynamics of de novo expressed open reading frame emergence inGenome research · 2023Article
- Estimating transcriptome complexities across eukaryotes.BMC genomics · 2023Article
- The evolutionary patterns, expression profiles, and genetic diversity of expanded genes in barley.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
- Distinct chromosomal "niches" in the genome ofNAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2022Article
- Parallel evolution of amphioxus and vertebrate small-scale gene duplications.Genome biology · 2022Article
- In rice splice variants that restore the reading frame after frameshifting indel introduction are common, often induced by the indels and sometimes lead to organism-level rescue.PLoS genetics · 2022Article
- Article
- Evidence from Drosophila Supports Higher Duplicability of Faster Evolving Genes.Genome biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Systematic detection of brain protein-coding genes under positive selection during primate evolution and their roles in cognition.Genome research · 2021Article
- Comparative Genomic Analysis of the Pheromone Receptor Class 1 Family (V1R) Reveals Extreme Complexity in Mouse Lemurs (Genus, Microcebus) and a Chromosomal Hotspot across Mammals.Genome biology and evolution · 2020Article
- Greater genetic and regulatory plasticity of retained duplicates in Epichloë endophytic fungi.Molecular ecology · 2019Article
- Genomic changes associated with adaptation to arid environments in cactophilic Drosophila species.BMC genomics · 2019Article
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 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
An attractive and long-standing hypothesis regarding the evolution of genes after duplication posits that the duplication event creates new evolutionary possibilities by releasing a copy of the gene from constraint. Apparent support was found in numerous analyses, particularly, the observation of higher rates of evolution in duplicated as compared with singleton genes. Could it, instead, be that more duplicable genes (owing to mutation, fixation, or retention biases) are intrinsically faster evolving? To uncouple the measurement of rates of evolution from the determination of duplicate or singleton status, we measure the rates of evolution in singleton genes in outgroup primate lineages but classify these genes as to whether they have duplicated or not in a crown group of great apes. We find that rates of evolution are higher in duplicable genes prior to the duplication event. In part this is owing to a negative correlation between coding sequence length and rate of evolution, coupled with a bias toward smaller genes being more duplicable. The effect is masked by difference in expression rate between duplicable genes and singletons. Additionally, in contradiction to the classical assumption, we find no convincing evidence for an increase in dN/dS after duplication, nor for rate asymmetry between duplicates. We conclude that high rates of evolution of duplicated genes are not solely a consequence of the duplication event, but are rather a predictor of duplicability. These results are consistent with a model in which successful gene duplication events in mammals are skewed toward events of minimal phenotypic impact.
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.