Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19094205›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2008

The fate of the duplicated androgen receptor in fishes: a late neofunctionalization event?

Véronique Douard, Frédéric Brunet, Bastien Boussau, Isabelle Ahrens-Fath, Virginie Vlaeminck-Guillem, Bernard Haendler, Vincent Laudet, Yann Guiguen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 94 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Control of testes mass by androgen receptor paralogs in a cichlid.Journal of comparative physiology. B, Biochemical, systemic, and environmental physiology · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Modular genetic control of social status in a cichlid fish.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Véronique DouardINRA-SCRIBE IFR 140, Campus de Beaulieu, 35042 Rennes Cedex, France. douardve@umdnj.edu
Frédéric Brunet
Bastien Boussau
Isabelle Ahrens-Fath
Virginie Vlaeminck-Guillem
Bernard Haendler
Vincent Laudet
Yann Guiguen
Bayer (Germany) · DEFish Physiology and Genomics Institute · FRUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRLaboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBased on the observation of an increased number of paralogous genes in teleost fishes compared with other vertebrates and on the conserved synteny between duplicated copies, it has been shown that a whole genome duplication (WGD) occurred during the evolution of Actinopterygian fish. Comparative phylogenetic dating of this duplication event suggests that it occurred early on, specifically in teleosts. It has been proposed that this event might have facilitated the evolutionary radiation and the phenotypic diversification of the teleost fish, notably by allowing the sub- or neo-functionalization of many duplicated genes.

resultsIn this paper, we studied in a wide range of Actinopterygians the duplication and fate of the androgen receptor (AR, NR3C4), a nuclear receptor known to play a key role in sex-determination in vertebrates. The pattern of AR gene duplication is consistent with an early WGD event: it has been duplicated into two genes AR-A and AR-B after the split of the Acipenseriformes from the lineage leading to teleost fish but before the divergence of Osteoglossiformes. Genomic and syntenic analyses in addition to lack of PCR amplification show that one of the duplicated copies, AR-B, was lost in several basal Clupeocephala such as Cypriniformes (including the model species zebrafish), Siluriformes, Characiformes and Salmoniformes. Interestingly, we also found that, in basal teleost fish (Osteoglossiformes and Anguilliformes), the two copies remain very similar, whereas, specifically in Percomorphs, one of the copies, AR-B, has accumulated substitutions in both the ligand binding domain (LBD) and the DNA binding domain (DBD).

conclusionThe comparison of the mutations present in these divergent AR-B with those known in human to be implicated in complete, partial or mild androgen insensitivity syndrome suggests that the existence of two distinct AR duplicates may be correlated to specific functional differences that may be connected to the well-known plasticity of sex determination in fish. This suggests that three specific events have shaped the present diversity of ARs in Actinopterygians: (i) early WGD, (ii) parallel loss of one duplicate in several lineages and (iii) putative neofunctionalization of the same duplicate in percomorphs, which occurred a long time after the WGD.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene DuplicationAndrogen-Insensitivity SyndromeAnimalsCloning, MolecularDNA Mutational AnalysisFishesFish ProteinsGenomeHumansLikelihood FunctionsMaleMutationPhylogenyReceptors, AndrogenSequence AlignmentAR protein, humanFish ProteinsReceptors, Androgen

Identifiers

PMID19094205
PMCPMC2637867
OpenAlexW2114029176

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.