Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 335

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Origin of Interspecific Genomic Incompatibility via Gene Duplication

Lynch, Michael, Force, Allan G.·2000·The American Naturalist

Abstract

One of the great unsolved mysteries of evolutionary biology concerns the genetic mechanisms underlying the origin of genomic incompatibilities between species. Two prevailing thoughts are that such incompatibilities often result from epistatically interacting genes that act as loss-of-function alleles in hybrid backgrounds or from chromosomal rearrangements that result in mis-segregation during meiosis in hybrids. However, it is unclear how genes that cause a radical breakdown in hybrids arise without reducing fitness within species, and numerous cases of speciation appear to be unassociated with obvious chromosomal rearrangements. Here we suggest that duplicate genes, and more generally any kind of genomic redundancies, provide a powerful substrate for the origin of genomic incompatibilities in isolated populations. The divergent resolution of genomic redundancies, such that one population loses function from one copy while the second population loses function from a second copy at a different chromosomal location, leads to chromosomal repatterning such that gametes produced by hybrid individuals can be completely lacking in functional genes for a duplicate pair. Under this model, incompatibility factors accumulate with essentially no loss of fitness within populations as postulated under the Bateson-Dobzhansky-Muller (BDM) model of speciation and despite the fact that they arise from degenerative mutations. However, unlike the situation often envisioned under the BDM model, no change in the mode of gene action in hybrid backgrounds need be invoked. The plausibility of this model derives from a number of recent observations, including the fact that most genomes harbor substantial numbers of gene duplicates whose turnover is common and ongoing process and the fact that many genes have complex regulatory regions that facilitate their divergent resolution in sister taxa.

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 · 10.1086/316992

Cites

3 of 3 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

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 335

Metadata

Authors
Lynch, M., & Force, A. G.
Venue
The American Naturalist
Published
2000-12
Volume
156
Issue
6
Pages
590-605
ISSN
  • 0003-0147 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-5323
OpenAlex
W2052051563
Cited by
335
References
3
FWCI
22.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: The Origin of Interspecific Genomic Incompatibility via Gene Duplication. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/316992
The paper
Lynch, M., & Force, A. G. (2000). The Origin of Interspecific Genomic Incompatibility via Gene Duplication. The American Naturalist. https://doi.org/10.1086/316992

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.