Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31365533›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2019

Variation and selection on codon usage bias across an entire subphylum.

Abigail L LaBella, Dana A Opulente, Jacob L Steenwyk, Chris Todd Hittinger, Antonis Rokas

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 66 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Codon usage bias and molecular evolution ofFrontiers in genetics · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Patterns and drivers of genome-wide codon usage bias in the fungal order Sordariales.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2025
    Article
  11. A Recent Lineage Split inEcology and evolution · 2025
    Article
  12. Macroevolutionary changes in natural selection on codon usage reflect evolution of the tRNA pool across a budding yeast subphylum.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Abigail L LaBellaDepartment of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0068-6703
Dana A OpulenteLaboratory of Genetics, Genome Center of Wisconsin, DOE Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, Wisconsin Energy Institute, J. F. Crow Institute for the Study of Evolution, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-3224-7510
Jacob L SteenwykDepartment of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8436-595X
Chris Todd HittingerLaboratory of Genetics, Genome Center of Wisconsin, DOE Great Lakes Bioenergy Research Center, Wisconsin Energy Institute, J. F. Crow Institute for the Study of Evolution, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5088-7461
Antonis RokasDepartment of Biological Sciences, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7248-6551
Vanderbilt University · USUniversity of Wisconsin–Madison · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Variation in synonymous codon usage is abundant across multiple levels of organization: between codons of an amino acid, between genes in a genome, and between genomes of different species. It is now well understood that variation in synonymous codon usage is influenced by mutational bias coupled with both natural selection for translational efficiency and genetic drift, but how these processes shape patterns of codon usage bias across entire lineages remains unexplored. To address this question, we used a rich genomic data set of 327 species that covers nearly one third of the known biodiversity of the budding yeast subphylum Saccharomycotina. We found that, while genome-wide relative synonymous codon usage (RSCU) for all codons was highly correlated with the GC content of the third codon position (GC3), the usage of codons for the amino acids proline, arginine, and glycine was inconsistent with the neutral expectation where mutational bias coupled with genetic drift drive codon usage. Examination between genes' effective numbers of codons and their GC3 contents in individual genomes revealed that nearly a quarter of genes (381,174/1,683,203; 23%), as well as most genomes (308/327; 94%), significantly deviate from the neutral expectation. Finally, by evaluating the imprint of translational selection on codon usage, measured as the degree to which genes' adaptiveness to the tRNA pool were correlated with selective pressure, we show that translational selection is widespread in budding yeast genomes (264/327; 81%). These results suggest that the contribution of translational selection and drift to patterns of synonymous codon usage across budding yeasts varies across codons, genes, and genomes; whereas drift is the primary driver of global codon usage across the subphylum, the codon bias of large numbers of genes in the majority of genomes is influenced by translational selection.

Indexed as

Codon UsageBiasGenetic VariationGenome, FungalSaccharomycetalesSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID31365533
PMCPMC6701816
OpenAlexW2965977125

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.