Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36619711›Full record

ReviewEcology and evolution2022

Systematic review reveals sexually antagonistic knockouts in model organisms.

Jon Alexander Harper, Edward H Morrow

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Ecology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jon Alexander HarperEvolution, Behaviour and Environment Group, School of Life Sciences John Maynard Smith Building, University of Sussex Brighton UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1765-9990
Edward H MorrowDepartment of Environmental and Life Sciences Karlstad University Karlstad Sweden.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1853-7469
Karlstad University · SEUniversity of Sussex · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sexual antagonism is thought to be an important selective force in multiple evolutionary processes, but very few examples of the genes involved are known. Such a deficit of loci could partially be explained by the lack of overlap in terminology between scientific disciplines. Following a similar review in humans, we searched systematically for studies that described genes with sexually antagonistic or sex-opposite effects in any taxa, using terms designed to capture alternative descriptions of sexual antagonism. Despite drawing on a potentially very large pool of studies we found only eight articles, which between them described seven candidate variants, five of these were gene knockouts. In every case, the variants had net negative effects on the focal trait. One locus was independently validated between studies, but in comparison to previous data on variants in humans and the fruit-fly, the studies generally suffered from small sample sizes, with concomitant high variance. Our review highlights the radically different effects that gene deletions can have on males and females, where the beneficial effects seen in one sex may facilitate the evolution of gene loss. We searched systematically for genetic variants with sexually antagonistic or sex-opposite effects in any taxa. Of 2116 articles, we found seven candidate variants, five of which were gene knockouts. Our review highlights the radically different effects that gene deletions can have on males and females, where the beneficial effects seen in one sex may facilitate the evolution of gene loss.

Indexed as

evolutionary genomicsfitnessselection‐sexualsexual conflict

Identifiers

PMID36619711
PMCPMC9798040
OpenAlexW4313325316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.