Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Apr 13.
Published in final edited form as: Cell Host Microbe. 2016 Mar 31;19(4):481–492. doi: 10.1016/j.chom.2016.03.002

Figure 5. Host-specific strength of purifying selection in vivo.

Figure 5

(A-D) The strengths of purifying selection were compared between mosquito species and between mosquitoes and birds. Wild caught birds (American crows, house sparrows, and American robins) and 2 days old chicks (n = 3 for each species) were previously inoculated with the same WNVic used in this study and the serum was sequenced at 3 days post infection (Grubaugh et al., 2015). (A) Accumulation of potentially deleterious mutations was estimated by the number of high frequency iLVs. (B) The ratios of nonsynonymous (dN) to synonymous (dS) substitutions per nonsynonymous and synonymous coding sequence site, respectively (dN/dS, > 1 [dotted line] weak purifying selection, < 1 strong purifying selection), (C) the dN rates, and (D) the dS rates were used to infer the strength of purifying selection. All data were summarized using the mean (A, B) or geometric mean (C, D) and the 95% confidence interval from each tissue and biological replicate per host (*, p < 0.05; ns, not significant).