ArticleFrontiers in genetics2022
No evidence for widespread positive selection on double substitutions within codons in primates and yeasts.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
Nucleotide substitutions in protein-coding genes can be divided into synonymous (S) and non-synonymous (N) ones that alter amino acids (including nonsense mutations causing stop codons). The S substitutions are expected to have little effect on function. The N substitutions almost always are affected by strong purifying selection that eliminates them from evolving populations. However, additional mutations of nearby bases can modulate the deleterious effect of single N substitutions and, thus, could be subjected to the positive selection. This effect has been demonstrated for mutations in the serine codons, stop codons and double N substitutions in prokaryotes. In all abovementioned cases, a novel technique was applied that allows elucidating the effects of selection on double substitutions considering mutational biases. Here, we applied the same technique to study double N substitutions in eukaryotic lineages of primates and yeast. We identified markedly fewer cases of purifying selection relative to prokaryotes and no evidence of codon double substitutions under positive selection. This is consistent with previous studies of serine codons in primates and yeast. In general, the obtained results strongly suggest that there are major differences between studied pro- and eukaryotes; double substitutions in primates and yeasts largely reflect mutational biases and are not hallmarks of selection. This is especially important in the context of detection of positive selection in codons because it has been suggested that multiple mutations in codons cause false inferences of lineage-specific site positive selection. It is likely that this concern is applicable to previously studied prokaryotes but not to primates and yeasts where markedly fewer double substitutions are affected by positive selection.
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.