Skip Navigation


MBE Advance Access originally published online on October 20, 2006
Molecular Biology and Evolution 2007 24(1):182-191; doi:10.1093/molbev/msl141
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Supplementary Material
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
24/1/182    most recent
msl141v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bauer DuMont, V. L.
Right arrow Articles by Aquadro, C. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bauer DuMont, V. L.
Right arrow Articles by Aquadro, C. F.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Molecular Biology and Evolution. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Research Articles

Recurrent Positive Selection at Bgcn, a Key Determinant of Germ Line Differentiation, Does Not Appear to be Driven by Simple Coevolution with Its Partner Protein Bam

Vanessa L. Bauer DuMont, Heather A. Flores, Mark H. Wright and Charles F. Aquadro

Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University

E-mail: cfa1{at}cornell.edu.

Accepted for publication October 5, 2006.

Surveys of nucleotide sequence polymorphism in Drosophila melanogaster and Drosophila simulans were performed at 2 interacting loci crucial for gametogenesis: bag-of-marbles (bam) and benign gonial cell neoplasm (bgcn). At the polymorphism level, both loci appear to be evolving under the expectations of the neutral theory. However, ratios of polymorphism and divergence for synonymous and nonsynonymous mutations depart significantly from neutral expectations for both loci consistent with a previous observation of positive selection at bam. The deviations suggest either an excess of synonymous polymorphisms or an excess of nonsynonymous fixations at both loci. Synonymous evolution appears to conform to neutrality at bam. At bgcn, there is evidence of positive selection affecting preferred synonymous mutations along the D. simulans lineage. However, there is also a significantly higher rate of nonsynonymous fixations at bgcn within D. simulans. Thus, the deviation from neutrality detected by the McDonald–Kreitman test at these 2 loci is likely due to the selective acceleration of nonsynonymous fixations. Differences in the pattern of amino acid fixations between these 2 interacting proteins suggest that the detected positive selection is not due to a simple model of coevolution.

Key Words: Drosophila • bam • bgcn • positive selection • nonsynonymous

John H. McDonald, Associate Editor


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 GeneticsHome page
A. Llopart and J. M. Comeron
Recurrent Events of Positive Selection in Independent Drosophila Lineages at the Spermatogenesis Gene roughex
Genetics, June 1, 2008; 179(2): 1009 - 1020.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 GeneticsHome page
W. Haerty, S. Jagadeeshan, R. J. Kulathinal, A. Wong, K. Ravi Ram, L. K. Sirot, L. Levesque, C. G. Artieri, M. F. Wolfner, A. Civetta, et al.
Evolution in the Fast Lane: Rapidly Evolving Sex-Related Genes in Drosophila
Genetics, November 1, 2007; 177(3): 1321 - 1335.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.