Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11691848›Full record

ArticleGenome research2001

Pattern and timing of gene duplication in animal genomes.

R Friedman, A L Hughes

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 205 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Foxg1 and companions: Not only transcription factors.Neural regeneration research · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genome-Wide Identification and Analysis of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  5. Diversification and Functional Evolution of HOX Proteins.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. DrML: probabilistic modeling of gene duplications.Journal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology · 2014
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Genome Size and Species Diversification.Evolutionary biology · 2010
    Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

R FriedmanDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA.
A L Hughes
University of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Duplication of genes, giving rise to multigene families, has been a characteristic feature of the evolution of eukaryotic genomes. In the case of vertebrates, it has been proposed that an increase in gene number resulted from two rounds of duplication of the entire genome by polyploidization (the 2R hypothesis). In the most extensive test to date of this hypothesis, we compared gene numbers in homologous families and conducted phylogenetic analyses of gene families with two to eight members in the complete genomes of Caenorhabditis elegans and Drosophila melanogaster and the available portion of the human genome. Although the human genome showed a higher proportion of recent gene duplications than the other animal genomes, the proportion of duplications after the deuterostome-protostome split was constant across families, with no peak of such duplications in four-member families, contrary to the expectation of the 2R hypothesis. A substantial majority (70.9%) of human four-member families and four-member clusters in larger families showed topologies inconsistent with two rounds of polyploidization in vertebrates.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene DuplicationGenomeAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansDrosophila melanogasterGenesGenes, HelminthGenes, InsectGenome, HumanHumansMultigene FamilyPhylogeny

Identifiers

PMID11691848
PMCPMC311158
OpenAlexW2104724853

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.