ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2023
Testing a candidate meiotic drive locus identified by pool sequencing.
Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The missing data problem in population genomics and statistical methods to address them.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2026Article
- Consequences of drive on the evolution of genomes and species.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Article
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Meiotic drive biases the transmission of alleles in heterozygous individuals, such that Mendel's law of equal segregation is violated. Most examples of meiotic drive have been discovered over the past century based on causing sex ratio distortion or the biased transmission of easily scoreable genetic markers that were linked to drive alleles. More recently, several approaches have been developed that attempt to identify distortions of Mendelian segregation genome wide. Here, we test a candidate female meiotic drive locus in Drosophila melanogaster, identified previously as causing a ∼54:46 distortion ratio using sequencing of large pools of backcross progeny. We inserted fluorescent visible markers near the candidate locus and scored transmission in thousands of individual progeny. We observed a small but significant deviation from the Mendelian expectation; however, it was in the opposite direction to that predicted based on the original experiments. We discuss several possible causes of the discrepancy between the 2 approaches, noting that subtle viability effects are particularly challenging to disentangle from potential small-effect meiotic drive loci. We conclude that pool sequencing approaches remain a powerful method to identify candidate meiotic drive loci but that genotyping of individual progeny at early developmental stages may be required for robust confirmation.
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.