Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34969986›Full record

ArticleNature ecology & evolution2022

Dosage sensitivity and exon shuffling shape the landscape of polymorphic duplicates in Drosophila and humans.

Dan Zhang, Liang Leng, Chunyan Chen, Jiawei Huang, Yaqiong Zhang, Hao Yuan, Chenyu Ma, Hua Chen, Yong E Zhang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature ecology & evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Fixation of Expression Divergences by Natural Selection inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  9. De Novo Genes.Annual review of genetics · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Dan Zhang *Key Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution & State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0871-7914
Liang Leng *Institute of Chinese Materia Medica, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9629-6808
Chunyan ChenKey Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution & State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Jiawei HuangKey Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution & State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Yaqiong ZhangKey Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution & State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4612-6392
Hao YuanKey Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution & State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Chenyu MaKey Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution & State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.
Hua ChenUniversity of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9829-6561
Yong E ZhangKey Laboratory of Zoological Systematics and Evolution & State Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Pest Insects and Rodents, Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China. zhangyong@ioz.ac.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3770-2383

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite polymorphic duplicate genes' importance for the early stages of duplicate gene evolution, they are less studied than old gene duplicates. Two essential questions thus remain poorly addressed: how does dosage sensitivity, imposed by stoichiometry in protein complexes or by X chromosome dosage compensation, affect the emergence of complete duplicate genes? Do introns facilitate intergenic and intragenic chimaerism as predicted by the theory of exon shuffling? Here, we analysed new data for Drosophila and public data for humans, to characterize polymorphic duplicate genes with respect to dosage, exon-intron structures and allele frequencies. We found that complete duplicate genes are under dosage constraint induced by protein stoichiometry but potentially tolerated by X chromosome dosage compensation. We also found that in the intron-rich human genome, gene fusions and intragenic duplications extensively use intronic breakpoints generating in-frame proteins, in accordance with the theory of exon shuffling. Finally, we found that only a small proportion of complete or partial duplicates are at high frequencies, indicating the deleterious nature of dosage or gene structural changes. Altogether, we demonstrate how mechanistic factors including dosage sensitivity and exon-intron structure shape the short-term functional consequences of gene duplication.

Indexed as

DNA ShufflingDrosophilaGene DuplicationAnimalsDosage Compensation, GeneticExonsGene DosageGenes, DuplicateHumansIntrons

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.