Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35671756›Full record

SynthesisCurrent biology : CB2022

The evolutionary trajectory of drosophilid walking.

Ryan A York, Luke E Brezovec, Jenn Coughlan, Steven Herbst, Avery Krieger, Su-Yee Lee, Brandon Pratt, Ashley D Smart, Eugene Song, Anton Suvorov and 3 more

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Current biology : CB, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Inhibitory control explains locomotor statistics in walkingProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Inhibitory control of locomotor statistics in walkingbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A recurrent neural circuit inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  9. Fine-grained descending control of steering in walkingbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors.

Ryan A YorkDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: ryanayork@gmail.com.
Luke E BrezovecDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Jenn CoughlanBiology Department, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Steven HerbstDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Avery KriegerDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Su-Yee LeeDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
Brandon PrattDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
Ashley D SmartDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Eugene SongDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Anton SuvorovBiology Department, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
Daniel R MatuteBiology Department, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
John C TuthillDepartment of Physiology and Biophysics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
Thomas R ClandininDepartment of Neurobiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. Electronic address: trc@stanford.edu.

Funding

Training Program in Basic NeuroscienceT32MH020016 · NIMH · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Justin L Gardner, Merritt C Maduke · 1997 to 2026
$16.2M
Project 4: Neural Basis of Behavioral SequencesU19NS104655 · NINDS · CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI CLANDININ, THOMAS ROBERT, DICKINSON, MICHAEL H · 2017 to 2021
$14.6M
Stanford Vision Research CoreP30EY026877 · NEI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Jeffrey L Goldberg · 2017 to 2026
$8.0M
The prevalence of genetic introgression in speciationR01GM121750 · NIGMS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MATUTE, DANIEL · 2017 to 2021
$1.7M
NEI NIH HHS P30 EY026877NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM121750NIMH NIH HHS T32 MH020016NINDS NIH HHS U19 NS104655
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neural circuits must both execute the behavioral repertoire of individuals and account for behavioral variation across species. Understanding how this variation emerges over evolutionary time requires large-scale phylogenetic comparisons of behavioral repertoires. Here, we describe the evolution of walking in fruit flies by capturing high-resolution, unconstrained movement from 13 species and 15 strains of drosophilids. We find that walking can be captured in a universal behavior space, the structure of which is evolutionarily conserved. However, the occurrence of and transitions between specific movements have evolved rapidly, resulting in repeated convergent evolution in the temporal structure of locomotion. Moreover, a meta-analysis demonstrates that many behaviors evolve more rapidly than other traits. Thus, the architecture and physiology of locomotor circuits can execute precise individual movements in one species and simultaneously support rapid evolutionary changes in the temporal ordering of these modular elements across clades.

Indexed as

DrosophilaLocomotionAnimalsPhenotypePhylogenyanimal behaviorbehavioral evolutionDrosophilaethologylocomotionphylogeneticsTREBLE

Identifiers

PMID35671756
PMCPMC9329251

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.