ArticleGenome biology and evolution2026
The Evolutionary Flexibility of the Drosophila Circadian Clock: Network Constraints or Adaptive Freedom?
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study of network evolution is critical to understanding how complex biological processes arise and adapt over time. Protein networks, composed of interacting components, can exhibit varying degrees of conservation and flexibility, enabling organisms to fine-tune their responses to environmental changes. Using the circadian clock system in Drosophila as a case study, we explore how such networks evolve. We leverage the recently published 101 Drosophilidae genome project to analyze the evolution and co-evolution of 11 core clock proteins across 65 species spanning about 60 million years of evolution. A sliding window analysis of coding regions reveals substantial heterogeneity in nucleotide divergence, with Clk and per exhibiting high divergence, whereas Pdp1 and sgg show virtually no evolutionary change. Additionally, we assessed interdependent amino acid evolution across different proteins, identifying 67 co-evolving site pairs, primarily among CLK-PER, CLK-CWO, and SGG-PER. Using codon-based models of evolution, we found four genes (cwo, jet, per, and sgg) showing evidence of positive selection. Since several clock proteins are pleiotropic, we tested whether their multifunctionality influences their evolutionary constraints. Using alternative approaches to assess pleiotropy, we found no significant correlation between pleiotropy and the nonsynonymous substitution rate (Ka) in 440 Drosophila proteins, including circadian clock ones. Overall, our findings suggest that the circadian clock network does not impose strong constraints on the evolution of its components. This flexibility may facilitate species-specific adaptation of the clock and allow the pleiotropic functions of clock proteins.
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.