The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Analysis of the genome sequences of three Drosophila melanogaster spontaneous mutation accumulation lines
Open accessAbstract
We inferred the rate and properties of new spontaneous mutations in Drosophila melanogaster by carrying out whole-genome shotgun sequencing-by-synthesis of three mutation accumulation (MA) lines that had been maintained by close inbreeding for an average of 262 generations. We tested for the presence of new mutations by generating alignments of each MA line to the D. melanogaster reference genome sequence and then compared these alignments base by base. We determined empirically that at least five reads at a site within each line are required for accurate single nucleotide mutation calling. We mapped a total of 174 single-nucleotide mutations, giving a single nucleotide mutation rate of 3.5 × 10−9 per site per generation. There were no false positives in a random sample of 40 of these mutations checked by Sanger sequencing. Variation in the numbers of mutations among the MA lines was small and nonsignificant. Numbers of transition and transversion mutations were 86 and 88, respectively, implying that transition mutation rate is close to 2× the transversion rate. We observed 1.5× as many G or C → A or T as A or T → G or C mutations, implying that the G or C → A or T mutation rate is close to 2× the A or T → G or C mutation rate. The base composition of the genome is therefore not at an equilibrium determined solely by mutation. The predicted G + C content at mutational equilibrium (33%) is similar to that observed in transposable element remnants. Nearest-neighbor mutational context dependencies are nonsignificant, suggesting that this is a weak phenomenon in Drosophila. We also saw nonsignificant differences in the mutation rate between transcribed and untranscribed regions, implying that any transcription-coupled repair process is weak. Of seven short indel mutations confirmed, six were deletions, consistent with the deletion bias that is thought to exist in Drosophila.
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
Base-Calling of Automated Sequencer Traces Using Phred. I. Accuracy Assessment
Ewing, B., Hillier, L., Wendl, M. C., & Green, P. (1998) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.8.3.175 · Cited by 6,967
Genetics and Analysis of Quantitative Traits
(2002) · Journal of Animal Breeding and Genetics · doi:10.1046/j.1439-0388.2002.00356.x · Cited by 6,092
Base-Calling of Automated Sequencer Traces Using Phred. II. Error Probabilities
Ewing, B., & Green, P. (1998) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.8.3.186 · Cited by 5,439
Accurate whole human genome sequencing using reversible terminator chemistry
Bentley, D. R., Balasubramanian, S., Swerdlow, H. P., Smith, G. P., Milton, J., Brown, C. G., Hall, K. P., Evers, D. J., Barnes, C. L., Bignell, H. R., et al. (2008) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature07517 · Cited by 3,684
Mapping short DNA sequencing reads and calling variants using mapping quality scores
Li, H., Ruan, J., & Durbin, R. (2008) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.078212.108 · Cited by 2,638
A genome-wide view of the spectrum of spontaneous mutations in yeast.
Lynch, M., Sung, W., Morris, K., Coffey, N., Landry, C. R., Dopman, E. B., Dickinson, W. J., Okamoto, K., Kulkarni, S., Hartl, D. L., et al. (2008) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0803466105 · Cited by 708
Population Genomics: Whole-Genome Analysis of Polymorphism and Divergence in Drosophila simulans
Begun, D. J., Holloway, A. K., Stevens, K., Hillier, L. W., Poh, Y.-P., Hahn, M. W., Nista, P. M., Jones, C. D., Kern, A. D., Dewey, C. N., et al. (2007) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050310 · Cited by 626
Mukai, T. (1964) · Genetics · doi:10.1093/genetics/50.1.1 · Cited by 463
Intraspecific nuclear DNA variation in Drosophila
Moriyama, E. N., & Powell, J. R. (1996) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025563 · Cited by 419
Direct estimation of per nucleotide and genomic deleterious mutation rates in Drosophila
Haag-Liautard, C., Dorris, M., Maside, X., Macaskill, S., Halligan, D. L., Charlesworth, B., & Keightley, P. D. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05388 · Cited by 395
Self-citation
Cited by
Rate of de novo mutations and the importance of father’s age to disease risk
Kong, A., Frigge, M. L., Masson, G., Besenbacher, S., Sulem, P., Magnusson, G., Gudjonsson, S. A., Sigurdsson, A., Jonasdottir, A., Jonasdottir, A., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11396 · Cited by 2,134
Rate, molecular spectrum, and consequences of human mutation
Lynch, M. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0912629107 · Cited by 792
Evidence That Mutation Is Universally Biased towards AT in Bacteria
Hershberg, R., & Petrov, D. A. (2010) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001115 · Cited by 490
Pool, J. E., Corbett-Detig, R. B., Sugino, R. P., Stevens, K. A., Cardeno, C. M., Crepeau, M. W., Duchen, P., Emerson, J. J., Saelao, P., Begun, D. J., et al. (2012) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1003080 · Cited by 316
Evidence that adaptation in Drosophila is not limited by mutation at single sites
Karasov, T., Messer, P. W., & Petrov, D. A. (2010) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1000924 · Cited by 257
Metadata
- Authors
- Keightley, P. D., Trivedi, U., Thomson, M., Oliver, F., Kumar, S., & Blaxter, M. L.
- Venue
- Genome Research
- Publisher
- Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
- Published
- 2009-05-13
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1195-1201
- ISSN
- 1088-9051 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2150172942
- Cited by
- 357
- References
- 27
- Type
- posted content
- 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: Analysis of the genome sequences of three Drosophila melanogaster spontaneous mutation accumulation lines. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1101/gr.091231.109
- The paper
- Keightley, P. D., Trivedi, U., Thomson, M., Oliver, F., Kumar, S., & Blaxter, M. L. (2009). Analysis of the genome sequences of three Drosophila melanogaster spontaneous mutation accumulation lines. Genome Research. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.091231.109
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.