ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2007
Assessing the evolutionary rate of positional orthologous genes in prokaryotes using synteny data.
Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
25 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.
- De Novo Gene Emergence: Summary, Classification, and Challenges of Current Methods.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Review
- De novo discovery of conserved gene clusters in microbial genomes with Spacedust.Nature methods · 2025Article
- Strain tracking in complex microbiomes using synteny analysis reveals per-species modes of evolution.Nature biotechnology · 2025Article
- Primary orthologs from local sequence context.BMC bioinformatics · 2020Article
- Genome-wide comparative analysis of the BAHD superfamily in seven Rosaceae species and expression analysis in pear (Pyrus bretschneideri).BMC plant biology · 2020Article
- Article
- WORMHOLE: Novel Least Diverged Ortholog Prediction through Machine Learning.PLoS computational biology · 2016Article
- Homoeologs: What Are They and How Do We Infer Them?Trends in plant science · 2016Review
- GenFamClust: an accurate, synteny-aware and reliable homology inference algorithm.BMC evolutionary biology · 2016Article
- Inferring Orthologs: Open Questions and Perspectives.Genomics insights · 2016Review
- Genome-wide identification and comparative analysis of the heat shock transcription factor family in Chinese white pear (Pyrus bretschneideri) and five other Rosaceae species.BMC plant biology · 2015Article
- A meta-approach for improving the prediction and the functional annotation of ortholog groups.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- Repertoire, unified nomenclature and evolution of the Type III effector gene set in the Ralstonia solanacearum species complex.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Mean protein evolutionary distance: a method for comparative protein evolution and its application.PloS one · 2013Article
- The use of evolutionary patterns in protein annotation.Current opinion in structural biology · 2012Review
- A tight link between orthologs and bidirectional best hits in bacterial and archaeal genomes.Genome biology and evolution · 2012Article
- Positional orthology: putting genomic evolutionary relationships into context.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2011Review
- Bacterial syntenies: an exact approach with gene quorum.BMC bioinformatics · 2011Article
- Article
- argC Orthologs from Rhizobiales show diverse profiles of transcriptional efficiency and functionality in Sinorhizobium meliloti.Journal of bacteriology · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundComparison of completely sequenced microbial genomes has revealed how fluid these genomes are. Detecting synteny blocks requires reliable methods to determining the orthologs among the whole set of homologs detected by exhaustive comparisons between each pair of completely sequenced genomes. This is a complex and difficult problem in the field of comparative genomics but will help to better understand the way prokaryotic genomes are evolving.
resultsWe have developed a suite of programs that automate three essential steps to study conservation of gene order, and validated them with a set of 107 bacteria and archaea that cover the majority of the prokaryotic taxonomic space. We identified the whole set of shared homologs between two or more species and computed the evolutionary distance separating each pair of homologs. We applied two strategies to extract from the set of homologs a collection of valid orthologs shared by at least two genomes. The first computes the Reciprocal Smallest Distance (RSD) using the PAM distances separating pairs of homologs. The second method groups homologs in families and reconstructs each family's evolutionary tree, distinguishing bona fide orthologs as well as paralogs created after the last speciation event. Although the phylogenetic tree method often succeeds where RSD fails, the reverse could occasionally be true. Accordingly, we used the data obtained with either methods or their intersection to number the orthologs that are adjacent in for each pair of genomes, the Positional Orthologous Genes (POGs), and to further study their properties. Once all these synteny blocks have been detected, we showed that POGs are subject to more evolutionary constraints than orthologs outside synteny groups, whichever the taxonomic distance separating the compared organisms.
conclusionThe suite of programs described in this paper allows a reliable detection of orthologs and is useful for evaluating gene order conservation in prokaryotes whichever their taxonomic distance. Thus, our approach will make easy the rapid identification of POGS in the next few years as we are expecting to be inundated with thousands of completely sequenced microbial genomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.