AI Insight
This study investigated whether the independent evolution of daytime activity (diurnality) in multiple mammalian lineages resulted in similar molecular changes to circadian clock genes. Researchers analyzed 18 core clock genes across 60 diurnal and nocturnal mammals, representing 10 independent gains of diurnality and 5 reversals to nocturnality, using six different evolutionary analysis methods. Despite strong statistical power to detect convergent evolution (confirmed through synthetic data testing), the study found no evidence that transitions between day and night activity patterns were driven by shared amino acid changes in core circadian clock genes.
Why it matters
This finding challenges assumptions about how circadian biology evolves and suggests that shifts in daily activity patterns in mammals may be controlled by mechanisms outside the core clock genes, such as downstream pathways or neural circuitry. Understanding the genetic basis of activity timing has implications for human health, including shift work adaptation and circadian rhythm disorders.
Understand the Science
⚠️ Preprint – Noch nicht peer-reviewed
Dieser Artikel wurde noch nicht von unabhängigen Experten begutachtet. Die Ergebnisse sind vorläufig und sollten mit Vorsicht interpretiert werden.
Following an ancestral nocturnal phase, diurnality evolved independently in multiple mammalian lineages after the Cretaceous-Palaeogene boundary. Whether these recurrent temporal-niche transitions drove convergent molecular evolution in the circadian oscillator remains largely untested. We analyzed 18 core clock genes and direct regulators across 60 diurnal and nocturnal mammals, identifying 10 independent gains of diurnality and 5 reversals to nocturnality on a fixed supertree topology. Using six complementary evolutionary frameworks (spanning substitution counts, profile shifts, selective regimes, and evolutionary rates) we tested for shared molecular adaptations. To ensure that our negative findings reflected biological reality rather than methodological insensitivity, we planted 90 synthetic convergent residues into the empirical alignments. While this benchmark demonstrated high power to detect broadly shared convergence (e.g., PCOC recovered 35 of 36 planted sites across ten lineages without false positives), empirical alignments showed no credible signal. Same-residue convergence occurred at expected background levels (0.310 observed vs. 0.337 null), and no gene displayed activity-dependent shifts in selective pressure or evolutionary rate. These results indicate that repeated transitions in mammalian activity patterns were not driven by a common set of detectable amino-acid changes in the core circadian machinery.