Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23593039›Full record

ArticlePLoS genetics2013

Reference-free population genomics from next-generation transcriptome data and the vertebrate-invertebrate gap.

Philippe Gayral, José Melo-Ferreira, Sylvain Glémin, Nicolas Bierne, Miguel Carneiro, Benoit Nabholz, Joao M Lourenco, Paulo C Alves, Marion Ballenghien, Nicolas Faivre and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 77 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
77citing papers in PubMed
15.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

77 citing papers in PubMed, 185 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Philippe GayralUniversité Montpellier 2, CNRS UMR 5554, Institut des Sciences de l'Evolution de Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
José Melo-Ferreira
Sylvain Glémin
Nicolas Bierne
Miguel Carneiro
Benoit Nabholz
Joao M Lourenco
Paulo C Alves
Marion Ballenghien
Nicolas Faivre
Khalid Belkhir
Vincent Cahais
Etienne Loire
Aurélien Bernard
Nicolas Galtier
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRUniversidade do Porto · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In animals, the population genomic literature is dominated by two taxa, namely mammals and drosophilids, in which fully sequenced, well-annotated genomes have been available for years. Data from other metazoan phyla are scarce, probably because the vast majority of living species still lack a closely related reference genome. Here we achieve de novo, reference-free population genomic analysis from wild samples in five non-model animal species, based on next-generation sequencing transcriptome data. We introduce a pipe-line for cDNA assembly, read mapping, SNP/genotype calling, and data cleaning, with specific focus on the issue of hidden paralogy detection. In two species for which a reference genome is available, similar results were obtained whether the reference was used or not, demonstrating the robustness of our de novo inferences. The population genomic profile of a hare, a turtle, an oyster, a tunicate, and a termite were found to be intermediate between those of human and Drosophila, indicating that the discordant genomic diversity patterns that have been reported between these two species do not reflect a generalized vertebrate versus invertebrate gap. The genomic average diversity was generally higher in invertebrates than in vertebrates (with the notable exception of termite), in agreement with the notion that population size tends to be larger in the former than in the latter. The non-synonymous to synonymous ratio, however, did not differ significantly between vertebrates and invertebrates, even though it was negatively correlated with genetic diversity within each of the two groups. This study opens promising perspective regarding genome-wide population analyses of non-model organisms and the influence of population size on non-synonymous versus synonymous diversity.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanMetagenomicsAnimalsBase SequenceDrosophilaGenotypeHaresHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansInvertebratesIsopteraOstreidaePolymorphism, Single NucleotideTranscriptomeTurtlesUrochordata

Identifiers

PMID23593039
PMCPMC3623758
OpenAlexW2032906301

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.