Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19342477›Full record

ArticleGenome research2009

Breakpoint regions and homologous synteny blocks in chromosomes have different evolutionary histories.

Denis M Larkin, Greg Pape, Ravikiran Donthu, Loretta Auvil, Michael Welge, Harris A Lewin

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 106 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
106citing 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

106 citing papers in PubMed, 182 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Random, fragile, or correlated: Mechanisms of synteny decay in mammals.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Evolution of the ancestral mammalian karyotype and syntenic regions.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  20. Article

46 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Denis M LarkinDepartment of Animal Sciences, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL 61801, USA.
Greg Pape
Ravikiran Donthu
Loretta Auvil
Michael Welge
Harris A Lewin
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The persistence of large blocks of homologous synteny and a high frequency of breakpoint reuse are distinctive features of mammalian chromosomes that are not well understood in evolutionary terms. To gain a better understanding of the evolutionary forces that affect genome architecture, synteny relationships among 10 amniotes (human, chimp, macaque, rat, mouse, pig, cattle, dog, opossum, and chicken) were compared at <1 human-Mbp resolution. Homologous synteny blocks (HSBs; N = 2233) and chromosome evolutionary breakpoint regions (EBRs; N = 1064) were identified from pairwise comparisons of all genomes. Analysis of the size distribution of HSBs shared in all 10 species' chromosomes (msHSBs) identified three (>20 Mbp) that are larger than expected by chance. Gene network analysis of msHSBs >3 human-Mbp and EBRs <1 Mbp demonstrated that msHSBs are significantly enriched for genes involved in development of the central nervous and other organ systems, whereas EBRs are enriched for genes associated with adaptive functions. In addition, we found EBRs are significantly enriched for structural variations (segmental duplications, copy number variants, and indels), retrotransposed and zinc finger genes, and single nucleotide polymorphisms. These results demonstrate that chromosome breakage in evolution is nonrandom and that HSBs and EBRs are evolving in distinctly different ways. We suggest that natural selection acts on the genome to maintain combinations of genes and their regulatory elements that are essential to fundamental processes of amniote development and biological organization. Furthermore, EBRs may be used extensively to generate new genetic variation and novel combinations of genes and regulatory elements that contribute to adaptive phenotypes.

Indexed as

Chromosome BreakageEvolution, MolecularAnimalsChromosomes, MammalianGene DuplicationGenomeHumansModels, GeneticSelection, GeneticSynteny

Identifiers

PMID19342477
PMCPMC2675965
OpenAlexW2108876013

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.