The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genomic Evidence for Adaptive Inversion Clines in Drosophila melanogaster
Abstract
Clines in chromosomal inversion polymorphisms-presumably driven by climatic gradients-are common but there is surprisingly little evidence for selection acting on them. Here we address this long-standing issue in Drosophila melanogaster by using diagnostic single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) markers to estimate inversion frequencies from 28 whole-genome Pool-seq samples collected from 10 populations along the North American east coast. Inversions In(3L)P, In(3R)Mo, and In(3R)Payne showed clear latitudinal clines, and for In(2L)t, In(2R)NS, and In(3R)Payne the steepness of the clinal slopes changed between summer and fall. Consistent with an effect of seasonality on inversion frequencies, we detected small but stable seasonal fluctuations of In(2R)NS and In(3R)Payne in a temperate Pennsylvanian population over 4 years. In support of spatially varying selection, we observed that the cline in In(3R)Payne has remained stable for >40 years and that the frequencies of In(2L)t and In(3R)Payne are strongly correlated with climatic factors that vary latitudinally, independent of population structure. To test whether these patterns are adaptive, we compared the amount of genetic differentiation of inversions versus neutral SNPs and found that the clines in In(2L)t and In(3R)Payne are maintained nonneutrally and independent of admixture. We also identified numerous clinal inversion-associated SNPs, many of which exhibit parallel differentiation along the Australian cline and reside in genes known to affect fitness-related traits. Together, our results provide strong evidence that inversion clines are maintained by spatially-and perhaps also temporally-varying selection. We interpret our data in light of current hypotheses about how inversions are established and maintained.
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
Chromosomal rearrangements and speciation
Rieseberg, L. H. (2001) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02187-5 · Cited by 1,457
Chromosome inversions, local adaptation and speciation
Kirkpatrick, M., & Barton, N. (2006) · Genetics · doi:10.1534/genetics.105.047985 · Cited by 1,178
Chromosomal rearrangements maintain a polymorphic supergene controlling butterfly mimicry
Joron, M., Frezal, L., Jones, R. T., Chamberlain, N. L., Lee, S. F., Haag, C. R., Whibley, A., Becuwe, M., Baxter, S. W., Ferguson, L., et al. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10341 · Cited by 574
Cited by
Evolutionary genomics can improve prediction of species’ responses to climate change
Waldvogel, A.-M., Feldmeyer, B., Rolshausen, G., Exposito-Alonso, M., Rellstab, C., Kofler, R., Mock, T., Schmid, K., Schmitt, I., Bataillon, T., et al. (2020) · Evolution Letters · doi:10.1002/evl3.154 · Cited by 348
Self-citationSpeciation as a sieve for ancestral polymorphism
Guerrero, R. F., & Hahn, M. W. (2017) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1111/mec.14290 · Cited by 109
Metadata
- Authors
- Kapun, M., Fabian, D. K., Goudet, J., & Flatt, T.
- Venue
- Molecular Biology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2016-01-21
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1317-1336
- ISSN
- 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-1719
- OpenAlex
- W2294549794
- Cited by
- 174
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 15.17
- 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: Genomic Evidence for Adaptive Inversion Clines in Drosophila melanogaster. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/molbev/msw016
- The paper
- Kapun, M., Fabian, D. K., Goudet, J., & Flatt, T. (2016). Genomic Evidence for Adaptive Inversion Clines in Drosophila melanogaster. Molecular Biology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msw016
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.