ArticleGenome biology and evolution2022
Evidence from Drosophila Supports Higher Duplicability of Faster Evolving Genes.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- A comprehensive and accessible database of jawed-vertebrate ohnologs.Science advances · 2026Article
- Unveiling the functional fate of duplicated genes through expression profiling and structural analysis.Genome research · 2025Article
- Orphan genes are not a distinct biological entity.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Ohnologs and SSD Paralogs Differ in Genomic and Expression Features Related to Dosage Constraints.Genome biology and evolution · 2023Article
- Comparative Analysis Reveals Different Evolutionary Fates and Biological Functions in Wheat Duplicated Genes (Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Characterization of large-scale genomic differences in the first complete human genome.Genome biology · 2023Article
- The evolutionary patterns, expression profiles, and genetic diversity of expanded genes in barley.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The faster rate of evolution of duplicated genes relative to singletons has been well documented in multiple lineages. This observation has generally been attributed to a presumed release from constraint following creation of a redundant, duplicate copy. However, it is not obvious that the relationship operates in this direction. An alternative possibility-that the faster rate of evolution predates the duplication event and the observed differences result from a higher propensity to duplicate in fast-evolving genes-has been tested in primates and in insects. However, these studies arrived at different conclusions and clarity is needed on whether these contrasting results relate to differences in methodology or legitimate biological differences between the lineages selected. Here, we test whether duplicable genes are faster evolving independent of duplication in the Drosophila lineage and find that our results support the conclusion that faster evolving genes are more likely to duplicate, in agreement with previous work in primates. Our findings indicate that this characteristic of gene duplication is not restricted to a single lineage and has broad implications for the interpretation of the impact of gene duplication. We identify a subset of "singletons" which defy the general trends and appear to be faster evolving. Further investigation implicates homology detection failure and suggests that these may be duplicable genes with unidentifiable paralogs.
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.