Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21629756›Full record

ArticlePLoS biology2011

Ever-young sex chromosomes in European tree frogs.

Matthias Stöck, Agnès Horn, Christine Grossen, Dorothea Lindtke, Roberto Sermier, Caroline Betto-Colliard, Christophe Dufresnes, Emmanuel Bonjour, Zoé Dumas, Emilien Luquet and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS biology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 83 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
83citing 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

83 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Heterogeneous Evolution of Sex Chromosomes in the Torrent Frog GenusInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Are plant and animal sex chromosomes really all that different?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Expanding the classical paradigm: what we have learnt from vertebrates about sex chromosome evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review

23 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

14 authors.

Matthias StöckDepartment of Ecology and Evolution, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Agnès Horn
Christine Grossen
Dorothea Lindtke
Roberto Sermier
Caroline Betto-Colliard
Christophe Dufresnes
Emmanuel Bonjour
Zoé Dumas
Emilien Luquet
Tiziano Maddalena
Helena Clavero Sousa
Iñigo Martinez-Solano
Nicolas Perrin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Non-recombining sex chromosomes are expected to undergo evolutionary decay, ending up genetically degenerated, as has happened in birds and mammals. Why are then sex chromosomes so often homomorphic in cold-blooded vertebrates? One possible explanation is a high rate of turnover events, replacing master sex-determining genes by new ones on other chromosomes. An alternative is that X-Y similarity is maintained by occasional recombination events, occurring in sex-reversed XY females. Based on mitochondrial and nuclear gene sequences, we estimated the divergence times between European tree frogs (Hyla arborea, H. intermedia, and H. molleri) to the upper Miocene, about 5.4-7.1 million years ago. Sibship analyses of microsatellite polymorphisms revealed that all three species have the same pair of sex chromosomes, with complete absence of X-Y recombination in males. Despite this, sequences of sex-linked loci show no divergence between the X and Y chromosomes. In the phylogeny, the X and Y alleles cluster according to species, not in groups of gametologs. We conclude that sex-chromosome homomorphy in these tree frogs does not result from a recent turnover but is maintained over evolutionary timescales by occasional X-Y recombination. Seemingly young sex chromosomes may thus carry old-established sex-determining genes, a result at odds with the view that sex chromosomes necessarily decay until they are replaced. This raises intriguing perspectives regarding the evolutionary dynamics of sexually antagonistic genes and the mechanisms that control X-Y recombination.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnuraFemaleGene FrequencyGenes, X-LinkedGenes, Y-LinkedGenetic LinkageGenetic MarkersGenetic SpeciationLikelihood FunctionsMaleModels, GeneticPhylogenyRecombination, GeneticSex Determination ProcessesX ChromosomeGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID21629756
PMCPMC3100596

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.