Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11032823›Full record

ArticleThe EMBO journal2000

Species-specific double-strand break repair and genome evolution in plants.

A Kirik, S Salomon, H Puchta

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in The EMBO journal, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed
20.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

77 citing papers in PubMed, 192 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Plant DNA Repair Pathways and Their Applications in Genome Engineering.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. An Insight into T-DNA Integration Events in Medicago sativa.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017
    Article
  14. Repair of adjacent single-strand breaks is often accompanied by the formation of tandem sequence duplications in plant genomes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. DNA recombination in somatic plant cells: mechanisms and evolutionary consequences.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2014
    Review
  20. Article

17 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A KirikInstitut für Pflanzengenetik und Kulturpflanzenforschung (IPK), Corrensstrabetae 3, D-06466 Gatersleben, Germany.
S Salomon
H Puchta
Leibniz Institute for Neurobiology · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Even closely related eukaryotic species may differ drastically in genome size. While insertion of retroelements represents a major source of genome enlargement, the mechanism mediating species- specific deletions is fairly obscure. We analyzed the formation of deletions during double-strand break (DSB) repair in Arabidopsis thaliana and tobacco, two dicotyledonous plant species differing >20-fold in genome size. DSBs were induced by the rare cutting restriction endonuclease I-SCE:I and deletions were identified by loss of function of a negative selectable marker gene containing an I-SCE:I site. Whereas the partial use of micro-homologies in junction formation was similar in both species, in tobacco 40% of the deletions were accompanied by insertions. No insertions could be detected in Arabidopsis , where larger deletions were more frequent, indicating a putative inverse correlation between genome size and the average length of deletions. Such a correlation has been postulated before by a theoretical study on the evolution of related insect genomes and our study now identifies a possible molecular cause for the phenomenon, indicating that species-specific differences in DSB repair might indeed influence genome evolution.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenome, PlantPlants, ToxicArabidopsisBlotting, SouthernDeoxyribonucleases, Type II Site-SpecificDNA, BacterialDNA, PlantDNA RepairGenes, PlantMutagenesis, InsertionalNicotianaPlants, Genetically ModifiedPromoter Regions, GeneticSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSequence DeletionDeoxyribonucleases, Type II Site-SpecificDNA, BacterialDNA, PlantSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSCEI protein, S cerevisiaeT-DNA

Identifiers

PMID11032823
PMCPMC314016
OpenAlexW2125071927

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.