Cited by 287Chromosomal and Genetic VariationsEvolution and Genetic DynamicsPlant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics

Centromere-associated female meiotic drive entails male fitness costs in monkeyflowers

Fishman, Lila, Saunders, Arpiar·2008·Science

Abstract

Female meiotic drive, in which paired chromosomes compete for access to the egg, is a potentially powerful but rarely documented evolutionary force. In interspecific monkeyflower ( Mimulus ) hybrids, a driving M. guttatus allele ( D ) exhibits a 98:2 transmission advantage via female meiosis. We show that extreme interspecific drive is most likely caused by divergence in centromere-associated repeat domains and document cytogenetic and functional polymorphism for drive within a population of M. guttatus. In conspecific crosses, D had a 58:42 transmission advantage over nondriving alternative alleles. However, individuals homozygous for the driving allele suffered reduced pollen viability. These fitness effects and molecular population genetic data suggest that balancing selection prevents the fixation or loss of D and that selfish chromosomal transmission may affect both individual fitness and population genetic load.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1126/science.1161406

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The two examples of female meiotic drive discovered in plants so far, in maize and monkeyflower, are not associated with translocations.

    “The two examples of female meiotic drive discovered in plants so far, in maize and monkeyflower (Buckler et al., 1999; Fishman and Saunders, 2008; Clark and Akera, 2021; Finseth et al., 2021), are not associated with translocations.”

    From Genomics of plant speciation (2023) · cites this paper as Fishman and Saunders, 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fishman, L., & Saunders, A.
Affiliations
University of Montana (US)
Corresponding author
  • Fishman, Lila
  • Saunders, Arpiar
Venue
Science
Published
2008-12-05
Volume
322
Issue
5907
Pages
1559-1562
ISSN
  • 0036-8075 (ISSN-L)
  • 1095-9203
OpenAlex
W1987871994
Cited by
287
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 13
FWCI
14.51
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Evolution and Genetic Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
Keywords
interspecific hybrids, Mimulus guttatus, selfish genetic elements, pollen viability, balancing selection
MeSH terms
Alleles, Base Sequence, Centromere, Crosses, Genetic, Biological Evolution, Genetic Markers, Heterozygote, Hybridization, Genetic, Meiosis, Molecular Sequence Data, Polymorphism, Genetic, Repetitive Sequences, Nucleic Acid, Selection, Genetic, Linkage Disequilibrium, Chromosome Segregation, Mimulus, Chromosomes, Plant

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