Levels of Analysis in Evolutionary Genetics: Novel Genes and the Misuse of Homology

Taxonomically restricted genes are increasingly understood to play major roles in evolution. However, a significant body of work has taken issue with the notion of widespread "novel" genes and argued that such genes have homologs in distant clades that can be found with either sufficiently powerful alignment techniques or by using synteny to find their ancestral sequences. Here, we argue that such work is misguided. Moreover, we argue that the whole notion of genetic assignment of function (and annotation) based on historical origin violates the levels of analysis distinction between origin and current utility. The evolutionary history of a gene is so often not reflective of its current utility that naming genes based on the function of their homologs is bad practice. This is nowhere more apparent than in the case of genes that have changed so radically from their ancestors that they bear no similarity to them at the sequence or protein folding levels. We coin the term, overwriting, for this process in which selection creates novel genes by completely changing the coding sequence of a gene in a manner that does not conserve function , and argue for the general importance of this mechanism.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B Molecular and Developmental Evolution
Published
2026-03-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jezb.70013
Primary Topic
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Levels of Analysis in Evolutionary Genetics: Novel Genes and the Misuse of Homology

Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B Molecular and Developmental Evolution
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
article

Levels of Analysis in Evolutionary Genetics: Novel Genes and the Misuse of Homology

article en

Abstract

Taxonomically restricted genes are increasingly understood to play major roles in evolution. However, a significant body of work has taken issue with the notion of widespread "novel" genes and argued that such genes have homologs in distant clades that can be found with either sufficiently powerful alignment techniques or by using synteny to find their ancestral sequences. Here, we argue that such work is misguided. Moreover, we argue that the whole notion of genetic assignment of function (and annotation) based on historical origin violates the levels of analysis distinction between origin and current utility. The evolutionary history of a gene is so often not reflective of its current utility that naming genes based on the function of their homologs is bad practice. This is nowhere more apparent than in the case of genes that have changed so radically from their ancestors that they bear no similarity to them at the sequence or protein folding levels. We coin the term, overwriting, for this process in which selection creates novel genes by completely changing the coding sequence of a gene in a manner that does not conserve function , and argue for the general importance of this mechanism.

Journal of Experimental Zoology Part B Molecular and Developmental Evolution
University of California, Davis (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.