Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31022179›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2019

Genome-wide sexually antagonistic variants reveal long-standing constraints on sexual dimorphism in fruit flies.

Filip Ruzicka, Mark S Hill, Tanya M Pennell, Ilona Flis, Fiona C Ingleby, Richard Mott, Kevin Fowler, Edward H Morrow, Max Reuter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Reverse genetics of sexual antagonism.Nature ecology & evolution · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. A century of theories of balancing selection.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Expression Divergence in Response to Sex-biased Selection.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

9 authors.

Filip RuzickaResearch Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Mark S HillResearch Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom.
Tanya M PennellSchool of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Ilona FlisSchool of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-4869-557X
Fiona C InglebySchool of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.
Richard MottResearch Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1022-9330
Kevin FowlerResearch Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9737-7549
Edward H MorrowSchool of Life Sciences, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-1853-7469
Max ReuterResearch Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-9554-0795

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evolution of sexual dimorphism is constrained by a shared genome, leading to 'sexual antagonism', in which different alleles at given loci are favoured by selection in males and females. Despite its wide taxonomic incidence, we know little about the identity, genomic location, and evolutionary dynamics of antagonistic genetic variants. To address these deficits, we use sex-specific fitness data from 202 fully sequenced hemiclonal Drosophila melanogaster fly lines to perform a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of sexual antagonism. We identify approximately 230 chromosomal clusters of candidate antagonistic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). In contradiction to classic theory, we find no clear evidence that the X chromosome is a hot spot for sexually antagonistic variation. Characterising antagonistic SNPs functionally, we find a large excess of missense variants but little enrichment in terms of gene function. We also assess the evolutionary persistence of antagonistic variants by examining extant polymorphism in wild D. melanogaster populations and closely related species. Remarkably, antagonistic variants are associated with multiple signatures of balancing selection across the D. melanogaster distribution range and in their sister species D. simulans, indicating widespread and evolutionarily persistent (about 1 million years) genomic constraints on the evolution of sexual dimorphism. Based on our results, we propose that antagonistic variation accumulates because of constraints on the resolution of sexual conflict over protein coding sequences, thus contributing to the long-term maintenance of heritable fitness variation.

Indexed as

Sex CharacteristicsAllelesAnimalsBiological EvolutionDrosophila melanogasterDrosophila simulansEvolution, MolecularFemaleGenetic FitnessGenetic VariationGenome-Wide Association StudyMalePhenotypePolymorphism, Single NucleotideReproductionSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID31022179
PMCPMC6504117

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.