↓ Skip to main content

Rapid divergence and diversification of mammalian duplicate gene functions

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Ecology and Evolution, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
78 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Rapid divergence and diversification of mammalian duplicate gene functions
Published in
BMC Ecology and Evolution, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12862-015-0426-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Raquel Assis, Doris Bachtrog

Abstract

Gene duplication provides raw material for the evolution of functional innovation. We recently developed a phylogenetic method that classifies evolutionary processes driving the retention of duplicate genes by quantifying divergence between their spatial gene expression profiles and that of their single-copy orthologous gene in a closely related sister species. Here, we apply our classification method to pairs of duplicate genes in eight mammalian genomes, using data from 11 tissues to construct spatial gene expression profiles. We find that young mammalian duplicates are often functionally conserved, and that expression divergence rapidly increases over evolutionary time. Moreover, expression divergence results in increased tissue specificity, with an overrepresentation of expression in male kidney, underrepresentation of expression in female liver, and strong underrepresentation of expression in testis. Thus, duplicate genes acquire a diversity of new tissue-specific functions outside of the testis, possibly contributing to the origin of a multitude of complex phenotypes during mammalian evolution. Our findings reveal that mammalian duplicate genes are initially functionally conserved, and then undergo rapid functional divergence over evolutionary time, acquiring diverse tissue-specific biological roles. These observations are in stark contrast to the much faster expression divergence and acquisition of broad housekeeping roles we previously observed in Drosophila duplicate genes. Due to the smaller effective population sizes of mammals relative to Drosophila, these analyses implicate natural selection in the functional evolution of duplicate genes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 78 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 1%
Sweden 1 1%
Canada 1 1%
China 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 73 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 31%
Researcher 15 19%
Student > Bachelor 7 9%
Student > Master 6 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 6%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 11 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 40 51%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 21 27%
Environmental Science 2 3%
Computer Science 1 1%
Unknown 14 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 July 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#2,928
of 3,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,019
of 276,529 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Ecology and Evolution
#62
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,714 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 276,529 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.