ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2019
Ancient gene drives: an evolutionary paradox.
Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and critical analysis of the evidence for transmission ratio distortion in humans.Genetics · 2026Pooled it
- The evolutionary genomics of meiotic drive.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Evolutionary persistence and divergence of thebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- DivergingEvolution letters · 2025Article
- Novel stressors and trait variation determine X-linked meiotic drive frequency.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Genetic conflict and the origin of multigene families: implications for sex chromosome evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Review
- TheeLife · 2022Article
- Supergene potential of a selfish centromere.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022Article
- Selfish migrants: How a meiotic driver is selected to increase dispersal.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2022Article
- Evolutionary robustness of killer meiotic drives.Evolution letters · 2021Article
- Selfing is the safest sex foreLife · 2021Article
- Selfish genetic elements and male fertility.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Review
- Polyandry blocks gene drive in a wild house mouse population.Nature communications · 2020Article
- Adequacy and sufficiency evaluation of existing EFSA guidelines for the molecular characterisation, environmental risk assessment and post-market environmental monitoring of genetically modified insects containing engineered gene drives.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2020Article
- Resistance to natural and synthetic gene drive systems.Journal of evolutionary biology · 2020Review
- Extensive Recombination Suppression and Epistatic Selection Causes Chromosome-Wide Differentiation of a Selfish Sex Chromosome inGenetics · 2020Article
- Gene drive: progress and prospects.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 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 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Selfish genetic elements such as selfish chromosomes increase their transmission rate relative to the rest of the genome and can generate substantial cost to the organisms that carry them. Such segregation distorters are predicted to either reach fixation (potentially causing population extinction) or, more commonly, promote the evolution of genetic suppression to restore transmission to equality. Many populations show rapid spread of segregation distorters, followed by the rapid evolution of suppression. However, not all drivers display such flux, some instead persisting at stable frequencies in natural populations for decades, perhaps hundreds of thousands of years, with no sign of suppression evolving or the driver spreading to fixation. This represents a major evolutionary paradox. How can drivers be maintained in the long term at stable frequencies? And why has suppression not evolved as in many other gene drive systems? Here, we explore potential factors that may explain the persistence of drive systems, focusing on the ancient sex-ratio driver in the fly
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.