Rapid subfunctionalization accompanied by prolonged and substantial neofunctionalization in duplicate gene evolution
Abstract
Gene duplication is the primary source of new genes. Duplicate genes that are stably preserved in genomes usually have divergent functions. The general rules governing the functional divergence, however, are not well understood and are controversial. The neofunctionalization (NF) hypothesis asserts that after duplication one daughter gene retains the ancestral function while the other acquires new functions. In contrast, the subfunctionalization (SF) hypothesis argues that duplicate genes experience degenerate mutations that reduce their joint levels and patterns of activity to that of the single ancestral gene. We here show that neither NF nor SF alone adequately explains the genome-wide patterns of yeast protein interaction and human gene expression for duplicate genes. Instead, our analysis reveals rapid SF, accompanied by prolonged and substantial NF in a large proportion of duplicate genes, suggesting a new model termed subneofunctionalization (SNF). Our results demonstrate that enormous numbers of new functions have originated via gene duplication.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Evolution of genetic signaling and regulatory systems usually proceeds through gene duplication and loss with neofunctionalization and subfunctionalization leading to functional changes.
“Evolution of genetic signaling and regulatory systems usually proceeds through gene duplication and loss with concomitant processes of neofunctionalization and subfunctionalization leading to functional changes”
From Mitochondrial retrograde control of transcription evolves with respiratory stress, metabolic adaptation, and virulence in budding yeasts (2026) · cites this paper as He and Zhang 2005
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 37 · Cited by 694
- Authors
- He, X., & Zhang, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Corresponding author
- Zhang, Jianzhi
- ORCID
- Zhang, Jianzhi
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-02-01
- Volume
- 169
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 1157-1164
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2156340505
- Cited by
- 694
- References
- 37
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 42 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 28 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 31 · 2012: 49
- FWCI
- 55.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model (vor)
- Locations
- Genetics (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM67030, R01GM067030)
- 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 › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genome Rearrangement Algorithms
- Keywords
- gene duplication, subfunctionalization, neofunctionalization, functional divergence, duplicate genes, protein-protein interaction, gene expression, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, human genes
- MeSH terms
- Amino Acid Sequence, Base Sequence, Gene Expression Regulation, Genes, Fungal, Humans, Models, Genetic, Molecular Sequence Data, Mutation, Probability, Proteins, Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid, Genome, Human, Gene Expression Regulation, Fungal, Sequence Homology, Amino Acid, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Evolution, Molecular, Gene Duplication, Saccharomyces cerevisiae Proteins
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