Retrogene survival is not impacted by linkage relationships

Summary

Ingested 2026-04-21. 2 findings extracted and verified.

Findings worth citing

Finding 1 — The authors compiled 4,426 retrocopies (106 retrogenes) paired with 1,431 parental genes in humans and 82 retrocopies (81 retrogenes) paired with 64 parental genes in Drosophila melanogaster from RetrogeneDB for their analysis.

After removing retrocopies with missing information (IDs, protein-coding status, etc), a total of 4,426 retrocopies were found for humans, with 106 retrogenes. Retrocopies were paired with 1,431 parental genes with 809 unique network partners. In D. melanogaster,8 2 retrocopies were found, 81 of which were retrogenes. — p. 5

Why this is citable: Provides the specific dataset sizes used, which is the quantitative basis anyone citing this study’s null result would need to assess statistical power and scope.

Counter / limitation: The human vs. Drosophila retrocopy counts are highly asymmetric and the authors acknowledge this reflects differences in prior data collection effort rather than true pseudogenization rates, limiting cross-species comparability.

Topics: genome_structure_evolution

Finding 2 — The well-documented out-of-the-X excess of retrogenes is recovered in both humans and D. melanogaster with p ≈ 0, validating the dataset while also motivating its exclusion from linkage tests.

After calculating the test statistic from our data, signi ficant results were found in both species, with p ∼ 0( Fig. S1). — p. 6

Why this is citable: Independent re-confirmation of the classic out-of-the-X pattern using RetrogeneDB data is useful as a citable replication that bolsters the meiotic sex chromosome inactivation hypothesis.

Counter / limitation: This is a re-analysis of an already well-established pattern rather than a novel discovery, and the p-value is reported only as approximately zero from 1,000 Monte Carlo iterations without effect-size decomposition.

Topics: sex_chromosome_evolution, sex_linkage_mutation

Read the paper

doi.org/10.7717/peerj.12822

Other papers by these authors

Question copied. Paste it into the NotebookLM tab.