Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19359064›Full record

ReviewTrends in genetics : TIG2009

The W, X, Y and Z of sex-chromosome dosage compensation.

Judith E Mank

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in genetics : TIG, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 85 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
85citing 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

85 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A long noncoding RNA influences the choice of the X chromosome to be inactivated.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  12. Do male and female heterogamety really differ in expression regulation? Lack of global dosage balance in pygopodid geckos.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  13. Thermosensitive sex chromosome dosage compensation in ZZ/ZW softshell turtles,Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  14. Sex-biased gene expression and recent sex chromosome turnover.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. A gene's-eye view of sexual antagonism.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2020
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

25 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

1 author.

Judith E MankUniversity of Oxford, Department of Zoology, Edward Grey Institute, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK. judith.mank@zoo.ox.ac.uk

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/H002006/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In species with highly differentiated sex chromosomes, imbalances in gene dosage between the sexes can affect overall organismal fitness. Regulatory mechanisms were discovered in several unrelated animals, which counter gene-dose differences between females and males, and these early findings suggested that dosage-compensating mechanisms were required for sex-chromosome evolution. However, recent reports in birds and moths contradict this view because these animals locally compensate only a few genes on the sex chromosomes, leaving the majority with different expression levels in males and females. These findings warrant a re-examination of the evolutionary forces underlying dosage compensation.

Indexed as

AnimalsDosage Compensation, GeneticEvolution, MolecularFemaleHumansMaleSex ChromosomesX Chromosome Inactivation

Identifiers

PMID19359064
PMCPMC2923031

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.