Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15705552›Full record

ArticleProceedings. Biological sciences2005

Rates and patterns of gene duplication and loss in the human genome.

James A Cotton, Roderic D M Page

Open access · greenAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings. Biological sciences, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Estimation for general birth-death processes.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2014
    Article
  16. DrML: probabilistic modeling of gene duplications.Journal of computational biology : a journal of computational molecular cell biology · 2014
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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.

James A CottonDivision of Environmental and Evolutionary Biology, Institute of Biomedical and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QE, UK. james.cotton@nhm.ac.uk
Roderic D M Page
University of Glasgow · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene duplication has certainly played a major role in structuring vertebrate genomes but the extent and nature of the duplication events involved remains controversial. A recent study identified two major episodes of gene duplication: one episode of putative genome duplication ca. 500 Myr ago and a more recent gene-family expansion attributed to segmental or tandem duplications. We confirm this pattern using methods not reliant on molecular clocks for individual gene families. However, analysis of a simple model of the birth-death process suggests that the apparent recent episode of duplication is an artefact of the birth-death process. We show that a constant-rate birth-death model is appropriate for gene duplication data, allowing us to estimate the rate of gene duplication and loss in the vertebrate genome over the last 200 Myr (0.00115 and 0.00740 Myr(-1) lineage(-1), respectively). Finally, we show that increasing rates of gene loss reduce the impact of a genome-wide duplication event on the distribution of gene duplications through time.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene DeletionGene DuplicationGenome, HumanModels, GeneticGenomicsHumans

Identifiers

PMID15705552
PMCPMC1634978
OpenAlexW2045395021

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.