The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Quantifying Adaptive Evolution in the Drosophila Immune System
Open accessAbstract
It is estimated that a large proportion of amino acid substitutions in Drosophila have been fixed by natural selection, and as organisms are faced with an ever-changing array of pathogens and parasites to which they must adapt, we have investigated the role of parasite-mediated selection as a likely cause. To quantify the effect, and to identify which genes and pathways are most likely to be involved in the host-parasite arms race, we have re-sequenced population samples of 136 immunity and 287 position-matched non-immunity genes in two species of Drosophila. Using these data, and a new extension of the McDonald-Kreitman approach, we estimate that natural selection fixes advantageous amino acid changes in immunity genes at nearly double the rate of other genes. We find the rate of adaptive evolution in immunity genes is also more variable than other genes, with a small subset of immune genes evolving under intense selection. These genes, which are likely to represent hotspots of host-parasite coevolution, tend to share similar functions or belong to the same pathways, such as the antiviral RNAi pathway and the IMD signalling pathway. These patterns appear to be general features of immune system evolution in both species, as rates of adaptive evolution are correlated between the D. melanogaster and D. simulans lineages. In summary, our data provide quantitative estimates of the elevated rate of adaptive evolution in immune system genes relative to the rest of the genome, and they suggest that adaptation to parasites is an important force driving molecular evolution.
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
Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (1998) · doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-2917-7 · Cited by 3,387
Cited by
Host Biology in Light of the Microbiome: Ten Principles of Holobionts and Hologenomes
Bordenstein, S. R., & Theis, K. R. (2015) · PLOS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002226 · Cited by 1,240
Schroder, K., Irvine, K. M., Taylor, M. S., Bokil, N. J., Le Cao, K.-A., Masterman, K.-A., Labzin, L. I., Semple, C. A., Kapetanovic, R., Fairbairn, L., et al. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1110156109 · Cited by 308
Natural selection shaped the rise and fall of passenger pigeon genomic diversity
Murray, G. G. R., Soares, A. E. R., Novak, B. J., Schaefer, N. K., Cahill, J. A., Baker, A. J., Demboski, J. R., Doll, A., Da Fonseca, R. R., Fulton, T. L., et al. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao0960 · Cited by 132
Peng, J., Svetec, N., & Zhao, L. (2022) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msab350 · Cited by 10
Metadata
- Authors
- Obbard, D. J., Welch, J. J., Kim, K.-W., & Jiggins, F. M.
- Venue
- PLoS Genetics
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2009-10-23
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- e1000698
- ISSN
- 1553-7390 (ISSN-L)
- 1553-7404
- OpenAlex
- W2146195472
- Cited by
- 258
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 9.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
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.