ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2026
Conservation and divergence of sex-biased gene expression across 50 million years of Drosophila evolution.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In sexually dimorphic species, sex-biased gene expression plays an important role in driving morphological, physiological, and behavioral differences between males and females. Here, we examined patterns of sex-biased gene expression within and among 6 Drosophila species with divergence times ranging from 2 to 50 million years. We detected contrasting patterns of sex bias conservation and turnover between heads and bodies, with more extensive sex-biased expression and greater conservation of sex-biased expression in the body, but more species-specific turnover of sex-biased expression in the head, where conserved, unbiased expression was common. Interestingly, lineage-specific gains of sex-biased expression occurred most often via concordant expression changes in both sexes that differed only in their magnitude, with this pattern being particularly strong in the head, suggesting that the majority of lineage-specific sex bias gains do not represent a resolution of sexual antagonism, but instead reflect regulatory changes shared between the sexes. We detected an enrichment of putatively positively selected expression changes among sex-biased genes in both body parts. Altogether, our findings suggest that sex-biased expression changes are often facilitated by selection, including selection acting on the sex with lower expression, which is especially common for male expression of female-biased genes. We also detected differences in the proportion of sex-biased genes located on the X chromosome depending on sex bias and body part. Overall, our results provide novel insights into the dynamics of sex-biased gene expression, as well as the molecular mechanisms and selective forces underlying its turnover, across short and long evolutionary timescales.
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.