ArticlePLoS biology2026
Comparative gene annotation and orthology assignments across 301 species of Drosophilidae.
Article in PLoS biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cross-Species Social Experience Suppresses Aggression in Drosophila.Neuroscience bulletin · 2026Article
- Predictors of Protein Evolution in the drosophilid Immune System.Genome biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Recurrent expansion and rapid evolution of the Drosophilid RNAi pathway in testis.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-quality genome annotations are essential if we are to address central questions in comparative genomics, such as the origin of new genes, the drivers of genome size variation, and the evolutionary forces shaping gene content and structure. Here, we present protein-coding gene annotations for 301 species of the family Drosophilidae, generated using the Comparative Annotation Toolkit (CAT) and BRAKER3, and incorporating available RNA-seq and protein evidence. We take a comparative phylogenetic approach to annotation, with the aim of improving consistency and accuracy, and to generate a robust set of gene annotations and orthology assignments. We analyze our annotations using a phylogenetic mixed-model approach and find that gene number and CDS length exhibit moderate phylogenetic heritability (40% and 9.7%, respectively). For comparison, we also present analyses using a subset of the 215 highest quality genomes, although the findings were not markedly different. Our work suggests that while evolutionary history contributes to variation in these traits, species-specific factors-including assembly error-play a substantial role in shaping observed differences. To illustrate the utility of our annotations for comparative analyses, we investigate codon usage bias and amino acid composition across Drosophilidae. We find that codon usage is correlated with overall GC content and evolves slowly, but that it is also strongly shaped by selection-such that, in general, species with the strongest selection on synonymous codon usage show the lowest GC bias in third codon positions. This comparative annotation dataset forms part of an ongoing collaborative project to sequence and annotate all species of Drosophilidae, with data and annotations being made rapidly and freely available on an ongoing basis. We hope that this effort will serve as a foundation for studies in evolutionary and functional genomics and comparative biology across Drosophilidae.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.