Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12836681›Full record

ReviewJournal of structural and functional genomics2003

Major transitions in evolution by genome fusions: from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, metazoans, bilaterians and vertebrates.

Jürg Spring

Abstract readReview
PubMed
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of structural and functional genomics, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
9.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jürg SpringInstitute of Zoology, University of Basel, Biocenter/Pharmacenter, Klingelbergstrasse 50, CH-4056 Basel, Switzerland. j.spring@unibas.ch
University of Basel · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The major transitions in human evolution from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, from protozoans to metazoans, from the first animals to bilaterians and finally from a primitive chordate to vertebrates were all accompanied by increases in genome complexity. Rare fusion of divergent genomes rather than continuous single gene duplications could explain these jumps in evolution. The origin of eukaryotes was proposed to be due to a symbiosis of Archaea and Bacteria. Symbiosis is clearly seen as the source for mitochondria. A fundamental difference of higher eukaryotes is the cycle from haploidy to diploidy, a well-regulated genome duplication. Of course, self-fertilization exists, but the potential of sex increases with the difference of the haploid stages, such as the sperm and the egg. What should be the advantage of having two identical copies of a gene? Still, genes duplicate all the time and even genomes duplicate rather often. In plants, polyploidy is well recognized, but seems to be abundant in fungi and even in animals, too. However, hybridization, rather than autopolyploidy, seems to be the potential mechanism for creating something new. The problem with chimaeric, symbiotic or reticulate evolution events is that they blur phylogenetic lineages. Unrecognized paralogous genes or random loss of one of the paralogs in different lineages can lead to false conclusions. Horizontal genome transfer, genome fusion or hybridization might be only truly innovative combined with rare geological transitions such as change to an oxygen atmosphere, snowball Earth events or the Cambrian explosion, but correlates well with the major transitions in evolution.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionGenomeAnimalsEukaryotic CellsGene DuplicationHumansProkaryotic CellsVertebrates

Identifiers

PMID12836681
OpenAlexW1541086211

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.