Signatures of selection in mammalian clock genes with coding trinucleotide repeats: Implications for studying the genomics of high-pace adaptation.

Climate change is predicted to affect the reproductive ecology of wildlife; however, we have yet to understand if and how species can adapt to the rapid pace of change. Clock genes are functional genes likely critical for adaptation to shifting seasonal conditions through shifts in timing cues. Many of these genes contain coding trinucleotide repeats, which offer the potential for higher rates of change than single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) at coding sites, and, thus, may translate to faster rates of adaptation in changing environments. We characterized repeats in 22 clock genes across all annotated mammal species and evaluated the potential for selection on repeat motifs in three clock genes (NR1D1,CLOCK, and PER1) in three congeneric species pairs with different latitudinal range limits: Canada lynx and bobcat (Lynx canadensis and L. rufus), northern and southern flying squirrels (Glaucomys sabrinus and G. volans), and white-footed and deer mouse (Peromyscus leucopus and P. maniculatus). Signatures of positive selection were found in both the interspecific comparison of Canada lynx and bobcat, and intraspecific analyses in Canada lynx. Northern and southern flying squirrels showed differing frequencies at common CLOCK alleles and a signature of balancing selection. Regional excess homozygosity was found in the deer mouse at PER1 suggesting disruptive selection, and further analyses suggested balancing selection in the white-footed mouse. These preliminary signatures of selection and the presence of trinucleotide repeats within many clock genes warrant further consideration of the importance of candidate gene motifs for adaptation to climate change.

The evolution of peer review as a basis for scientific publication: directional selection towards a robust discipline?

Peer review is pivotal to science and academia, as it represents a widely accepted strategy for ensuring quality control in scientific research. Yet, the peer-review system is poorly adapted to recent changes in the discipline and current societal needs. We provide historical context for the cultural lag that governs peer review that has eventually led to the system's current structural weaknesses (voluntary review, unstandardized review criteria, decentralized process). We argue that some current attempts to upgrade or otherwise modify the peer-review system are merely sticking-plaster solutions to these fundamental flaws, and therefore are unlikely to resolve them in the long term. We claim that for peer review to be relevant, effective, and contemporary with today's publishing demands across scientific disciplines, its main components need to be redesigned. We propose directional changes that are likely to improve the quality, rigour, and timeliness of peer review, and thereby ensure that this critical process serves the community it was created for.