Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29985527›Full record

ArticleEvolution; international journal of organic evolution2018

Directional selection reduces developmental canalization against genetic and environmental perturbations in Drosophila wings.

Benjamin R Groth, Yuheng Huang, Matthew J Monette, John E Pool

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Evolution; international journal of organic evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Benjamin R GrothLaboratory of Genetics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.
Yuheng HuangLaboratory of Genetics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1586-953X
Matthew J MonetteLaboratory of Genetics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.
John E PoolLaboratory of Genetics, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, 53706.

Funding

Causes and Consequences of Size Evolution in Drosophila melanogasterR01GM111797 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI POOL, JOHN E · 2014 to 2018
$1.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM111797
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural selection may enhance or weaken the robustness of phenotypes against genetic or environmental perturbations. However, important aspects of the relationship between adaptive evolution and canalization remain unclear. Recent work showed that the evolution of larger wing size in a high altitude natural population of Drosophila melanogaster was accompanied by decanalized wing development--specifically a loss of robustness to genetic perturbation. But this study did not address environmental robustness, and it compared populations that may have numerous biological differences. Here, we perform artificial selection on this same trait in D. melanogaster (larger wing length) and directly test whether this directional selection resulted in decanalization. We find that in general, size-selected replicates show greater frequencies of wing defects than control replicates both after mutagenesis (genetic perturbation) and when subjected to high temperature stress (environmental perturbation), although the increase in defect frequency varies importantly among replicates. These results support the hypothesis that directional selection may result in the loss of both genetic and environmental robustness-offering a rare window into the relationship between adaptation and canalization.

Indexed as

Artificial selectioncanalizationheat stressmutagenesiswing defect

Identifiers

PMID29985527
PMCPMC7003245

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.