ArticleEvolution; international journal of organic evolution2024
Sex-specific viability effects of mutations in Drosophila melanogaster.
Article in Evolution; international journal of organic evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sexual selection purges mutation load, but not overall genetic diversity, decreasing vulnerability to extinction.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Article
- HJ Muller and the Relationship Between Sex Chromosome Degeneration and the Evolution of Dosage Compensation.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Review
- Quantitative genetics of trauma induced mortality inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Fitness consequences of sex chromosome aneuploidy in Drosophila melanogaster.PLoS genetics · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In populations with separate sexes, genetic load due to deleterious mutations may be expressed differently in males and females. Evidence from insect models suggests that selection against mutations is stronger in males. This pattern will reduce deleterious allele frequencies at the expense of males, such that female mean fitness is greater than expected, preserving population persistence in the face of high mutation rates. While previous studies focus on reproductive success, mutation load depends on total selection in each sex, including selection for viability. We might expect minimal sex differences in viability effects in fruit flies, since male and female larvae behave similarly, yet many genes show sex-biased expression in larvae. We measured the sex-specific viability effects of nine "marker" mutations and 123 mutagenized chromosomes. We find that both types of mutations generally reduce viability in both sexes. Among marker mutations we detect instances of sex-biased effects in each direction; mutagenized chromosomes show little sex-specific mutational variance, but recessive lethals show a female bias, including in FlyBase records. We conclude that mutations regularly affect viability in a sex-specific manner, but that the strong pattern of male-biased mutational effects observed previously for reproductive success is not apparent at the pre-reproductive stage.
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.