ArticleScientific reports2020
Natural selection on sleep duration in Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The use ofFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Latitudinal Clines in Climate and Sleep Patterns Shape Disease Outcomes inEcology and evolution · 2025Article
- Genome-wide association in Drosophila identifies a role for Piezo and Proc-R in sleep latency.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Orthologs ofSleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2024Article
- Nonlinear expression patterns and multiple shifts in gene network interactions underlie robust phenotypic change in Drosophila melanogaster selected for night sleep duration.PLoS computational biology · 2023Article
- A conserved role forSleep advances : a journal of the Sleep Research Society · 2023Article
- Article
- The persistence and evolutionary consequences of vestigial behaviours.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2022Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Sleep is ubiquitous across animal species, but why it persists is not well understood. Here we observe natural selection act on Drosophila sleep by relaxing bi-directional artificial selection for extreme sleep duration for 62 generations. When artificial selection was suspended, sleep increased in populations previously selected for short sleep. Likewise, sleep decreased in populations previously selected for long sleep when artificial selection was relaxed. We measured the corresponding changes in the allele frequencies of genomic variants responding to artificial selection. The allele frequencies of these variants reversed course in response to relaxed selection, and for short sleepers, the changes exceeded allele frequency changes that would be expected under random genetic drift. These observations suggest that the variants are causal polymorphisms for sleep duration responding to natural selection pressure. These polymorphisms may therefore pinpoint the most important regions of the genome maintaining variation in sleep duration.
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.