The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Genomic Rate of Adaptive Amino Acid Substitution in Drosophila
Open accessAbstract
The proportion of amino acid substitutions driven by adaptive evolution can potentially be estimated from polymorphism and divergence data by an extension of the McDonald-Kreitman test. We have developed a maximum-likelihood method to do this and have applied our method to several data sets from three Drosophila species: D. melanogaster, D. simulans, and D. yakuba. The estimated number of adaptive substitutions per codon is not uniformly distributed among genes, but follows a leptokurtic distribution. However, the proportion of amino acid substitutions fixed by adaptive evolution seems to be remarkably constant across the genome (i.e., the proportion of amino acid substitutions that are adaptive appears to be the same in fast-evolving and slow-evolving genes; fast-evolving genes have higher numbers of both adaptive and neutral substitutions). Our estimates do not seem to be significantly biased by selection on synonymous codon use or by the assumption of independence among sites. Nevertheless, an accurate estimate is hampered by the existence of slightly deleterious mutations and variations in effective population size. The analysis of several Drosophila data sets suggests that approximately 25% +/- 20% of amino acid substitutions were driven by positive selection in the divergence between D. simulans and D. yakuba.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Yang, Z. (1994) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/bf00160154 · Cited by 2,960
Linkage disequilibrium in finite populations
Hill, W. G., & Robertson, A. (1968) · Theoretical and Applied Genetics · doi:10.1007/bf01245622 · Cited by 2,035
A codon-based model of nucleotide substitution for protein-coding DNA sequences.
(1994) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040153 · Cited by 1,960
Cited by
Evolution of genes and genomes on the Drosophila phylogeny
Drosophila 12 Genomes Consortium (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06341 · Cited by 2,010
Evolution on the X chromosome: unusual patterns and processes
Vicoso, B., & Charlesworth, B. (2006) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1914 · Cited by 499
Viruses are a dominant driver of protein adaptation in mammals
Enard, D., Cai, L., Gwennap, C., & Petrov, D. A. (2016) · eLife · doi:10.7554/elife.12469 · Cited by 361
The genomic rate of adaptive evolution
EYREWALKER, A. (2006) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.06.015 · Cited by 316
Self-citationNeutralism and selectionism: a network-based reconciliation
Wagner, A. (2008) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg2473 · Cited by 309
Metadata
- Authors
- Bierne, N., & Eyre-Walker, A.
- Venue
- Molecular Biology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-07
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1350-1360
- ISSN
- 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-1719
- OpenAlex
- W2115325942
- Cited by
- 225
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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 Genomic Rate of Adaptive Amino Acid Substitution in Drosophila. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/molbev/msh134
- The paper
- Bierne, N., & Eyre-Walker, A. (2004). The Genomic Rate of Adaptive Amino Acid Substitution in Drosophila. Molecular Biology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msh134
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.