ArticleGenome biology2010
2x genomes--depth does matter.
Article in Genome biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed.
- ncOrtho: efficient and reliable identification of miRNA orthologs.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- The human ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporter superfamily.Human mutation · 2022Review
- Complex Gene Loss and Duplication Events Have Facilitated the Evolution of Multiple Loricrin Genes in Diverse Bird Species.Genome biology and evolution · 2019Article
- Well-Annotated microRNAomes Do Not Evidence Pervasive miRNA Loss.Genome biology and evolution · 2018Article
- Ensembl comparative genomics resources.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016Article
- Inferring Orthologs: Open Questions and Perspectives.Genomics insights · 2016Review
- The Rise and Fall of TRP-N, an Ancient Family of Mechanogated Ion Channels, in Metazoa.Genome biology and evolution · 2015Article
- Evolutionary histories of transposable elements in the genome of the largest living marsupial carnivore, the Tasmanian devil.Molecular biology and evolution · 2015Article
- The OMA orthology database in 2015: function predictions, better plant support, synteny view and other improvements.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
- Analysis of 41 plant genomes supports a wave of successful genome duplications in association with the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary.Genome research · 2014Article
- Genome survey sequencing provides clues into glucosinolate biosynthesis and flowering pathway evolution in allotetrapolyploid Brassica juncea.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- PhylomeDB v4: zooming into the plurality of evolutionary histories of a genome.Nucleic acids research · 2014Article
- eggNOG v4.0: nested orthology inference across 3686 organisms.Nucleic acids research · 2014Article
- Comparative transcriptomics of early dipteran development.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Genome-scale coestimation of species and gene trees.Genome research · 2013Article
- Article
- Genome-wide scans for candidate genes involved in the aquatic adaptation of dolphins.Genome biology and evolution · 2013Article
- Contrasted evolution of the vomeronasal receptor repertoires in mammals and squamate reptiles.Genome biology and evolution · 2013Article
- Inferring duplications, losses, transfers and incomplete lineage sorting with nonbinary species trees.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2012Article
- Large-scale analysis of microRNA evolution.BMC genomics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGiven the availability of full genome sequences, mapping gene gains, duplications, and losses during evolution should theoretically be straightforward. However, this endeavor suffers from overemphasis on detecting conserved genome features, which in turn has led to sequencing multiple eutherian genomes with low coverage rather than fewer genomes with high-coverage and more even distribution in the phylogeny. Although limitations associated with analysis of low coverage genomes are recognized, they have not been quantified.
resultsHere, using recently developed comparative genomic application systems, we evaluate the impact of low-coverage genomes on inferences pertaining to gene gains and losses when analyzing eukaryote genome evolution through gene duplication. We demonstrate that, when performing inference of genome content evolution, low-coverage genomes generate not only a massive number of false gene losses, but also striking artifacts in gene duplication inference, especially at the most recent common ancestor of low-coverage genomes. We show that the artifactual gains are caused by the low coverage of genome sequence per se rather than by the increased taxon sampling in a biased portion of the species tree.
conclusionsWe argue that it will remain difficult to differentiate artifacts from true changes in modes and tempo of genome evolution until there is better homogeneity in both taxon sampling and high-coverage sequencing. This is important for broadening the utility of full genome data to the community of evolutionary biologists, whose interests go well beyond widely conserved physiologies and developmental patterns as they seek to understand the generative mechanisms underlying biological diversity.
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.