Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 316

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evolution of codon usage bias in Drosophila

Open access
Powell, Jeffrey R., Moriyama, Etsuko N.·1997·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

We first review what is known about patterns of codon usage bias in Drosophila and make the following points: (i)Drosophila genes are as biased or more biased than those in microorganisms. (ii) The level of bias of genes and even the particular pattern of codon bias can remain phylogenetically invariant for very long periods of evolution. (iii) However, some genes, even very tightly linked genes, can change very greatly in codon bias across species. (iv) Generally G and especially C are favored at synonymous sites in biased genes. (v) With the exception of aspartic acid, all amino acids contribute significantly and about equally to the codon usage bias of a gene. (vi) While most individual amino acids that can use G or C at synonymous sites display a preference for C, there are exceptions: valine and leucine, which prefer G. (vii) Finally, smaller genes tend to be more biased than longer genes. We then examine possible causes of these patterns and discount mutation bias on three bases: there is little evidence of regional mutation bias in Drosophila,mutation bias is likely toward A+T (the opposite of codon usage bias), and not all amino acids display the preference for the same nucleotide in the wobble position. Two lines of evidence support a selection hypothesis based on tRNA pools: highly biased genes tend to be highly and/or rapidly expressed, and the preferred codons in highly biased genes optimally bind the most abundant isoaccepting tRNAs. Finally, we examine the effect of bias on DNA evolution and confirm that genes with high codon usage bias have lower rates of synonymous substitution between species than do genes with low codon usage bias. Surprisingly, we find that genes with higher codon usage bias display higher levels of intraspecific synonymous polymorphism. This may be due to opposing effects of recombination.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.94.15.7784

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 316

Metadata

Authors
Powell, J. R., & Moriyama, E. N.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1997-07-22
Volume
94
Issue
15
Pages
7784-7790
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2089434733
Cited by
316
References
1
FWCI
4.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Evolution of codon usage bias in Drosophila. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.94.15.7784
The paper
Powell, J. R., & Moriyama, E. N. (1997). Evolution of codon usage bias in Drosophila. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.15.7784

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.