Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20051986›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2010

The evolution of gene duplications: classifying and distinguishing between models.

Hideki Innan, Fyodor Kondrashov

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 776 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
776citing 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

776 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Copy number evolution of conserved noncoding RNA gene families across mammals.Mammalian genome : official journal of the International Mammalian Genome Society · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

716 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

2 authors.

Hideki InnanGraduate University for Advanced Studies, Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0193, Japan. innan_hideki@soken.ac.jp
Fyodor Kondrashov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gene duplications and their subsequent divergence play an important part in the evolution of novel gene functions. Several models for the emergence, maintenance and evolution of gene copies have been proposed. However, a clear consensus on how gene duplications are fixed and maintained in genomes is lacking. Here, we present a comprehensive classification of the models that are relevant to all stages of the evolution of gene duplications. Each model predicts a unique combination of evolutionary dynamics and functional properties. Setting out these predictions is an important step towards identifying the main mechanisms that are involved in the evolution of gene duplications.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene DuplicationModels, GeneticAnimalsHumansPhylogenyPolymorphism, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID20051986

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.