ArticleEvolution letters2021
Evolutionary robustness of killer meiotic drives.
Article in Evolution letters, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Parental-effect gene-drive elements under partial selfing, or why do Caenorhabditis genomes have hyperdivergent regions?Genetics · 2025Article
- Parental-effect gene-drive elements under partial selfing, or why dobioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A meiotic driver is a selfish genetic element that interferes with the process of meiosis to promote its own transmission. The most common mechanism of interference is gamete killing, where the meiotic driver kills gametes that do not contain it. A killer meiotic driver is predicted to spread rapidly through a population at the expense of other genes in the rest of the genome. The rapid spread of a killer meiotic driver is expected to be chased by the rapid spread of a suppressor that returns fair meiosis. Paradoxically, while this might imply that meiotic drivers should be evolutionarily transient, numerous ancient killer meiotic drivers have been discovered that have persisted for millions of years. To understand the rationale that could potentially explain such evolutionary robustness, we explore different possible mechanisms of killer meiotic drive and the different possible associated mechanisms of suppression. We use a framework that considers how the different stages of meiosis result in different structured interactions among cells with different genotypes in various combinations. Across possible interactions, we show that there are three genotypically distinct drive mechanisms that create alternative selective conditions for the spread of different types of suppressors. We show that killer meiotic drivers are more evolutionarily robust if they operate among sister cells (after meiosis I and before meiosis II) than at any other point during meiosis. The different drive mechanisms we identify make testable predictions that could explain why some killer meiotic drivers are transient while others are ancient.
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.