Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24465486›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

On the origin and evolutionary history of NANOG.

Pierluigi Scerbo, Gabriel V Markov, Céline Vivien, Laurent Kodjabachian, Barbara Demeneix, Laurent Coen, Fabrice Girardot

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. The salamander blastema within the broader context of metazoan regeneration.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2023
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Pseudogenes: Four Decades of Discovery.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A sister ofOpen biology · 2017
    Article
  12. Vertebrate Axial Patterning: From Egg to Asymmetry.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Insights into theInternational journal of biological sciences · 2016
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Pierluigi ScerboDépartement Régulations, Développement et Diversité Moléculaire, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, France ; Institut de Biologie du Développement de Marseille, Aix-Marseille Université, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Marseille, France.
Gabriel V MarkovDépartement Régulations, Développement et Diversité Moléculaire, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, France ; Institut de Génomique Fonctionnelle de Lyon, Université de Lyon, Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Lyon, France ; Department for Evolutionary Biology, Max-Planck-Institute for Developmental Biology, Tuebingen, Germany.
Céline VivienDépartement Régulations, Développement et Diversité Moléculaire, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, France ; WatchFrog S.A., Evry, France.
Laurent KodjabachianInstitut de Biologie du Développement de Marseille, Aix-Marseille Université, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Marseille, France.
Barbara DemeneixDépartement Régulations, Développement et Diversité Moléculaire, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, France.
Laurent CoenDépartement Régulations, Développement et Diversité Moléculaire, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, France.
Fabrice GirardotDépartement Régulations, Développement et Diversité Moléculaire, Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Paris, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FREvolution des Régulations Endocriniennes · FRAix-Marseille Université · FRWatchfrog (France) · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Though pluripotency is well characterized in mammals, many questions remain to be resolved regarding its evolutionary history. A necessary prerequisite for addressing this issue is to determine the phylogenetic distributions and orthology relationships of the transcription factor families sustaining or modulating this property. In mammals, the NANOG homeodomain transcription factor is one of the core players in the pluripotency network. However, its evolutionary history has not been thoroughly studied, hindering the interpretation of comparative studies. To date, the NANOG family was thought to be monogenic, with numerous pseudogenes described in mammals, including a tandem duplicate in Hominidae. By examining a wide-array of craniate genomes, we provide evidence that the NANOG family arose at the latest in the most recent common ancestor of osteichthyans and that NANOG genes are frequently found as tandem duplicates in sarcopterygians and as a single gene in actinopterygians. Their phylogenetic distribution is thus reminiscent of that recently shown for Class V POU paralogues, another key family of pluripotency-controlling factors. However, while a single ancestral duplication has been reported for the Class V POU family, we suggest that multiple independent duplication events took place during evolution of the NANOG family. These multiple duplications could have contributed to create a layer of complexity in the control of cell competence and pluripotency, which could explain the discrepancies relative to the functional evolution of this important gene family. Further, our analysis does not support the hypothesis that loss of NANOG and emergence of the preformation mode of primordial germ cell specification are causally linked. Our study therefore argues for the need of further functional comparisons between NANOG paralogues, notably regarding the novel duplicates identified in sauropsids and non-eutherian mammals.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularAnimalsGenetic LociHomeodomain ProteinsHumansNanog Homeobox ProteinPhylogenySequence Homology, Amino AcidSyntenyHomeodomain ProteinsNanog Homeobox ProteinNANOG protein, human

Identifiers

PMID24465486
PMCPMC3894937
OpenAlexW2004704855

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.