ArticleGenes2010
Genomic and population-level effects of gene conversion in caenorhabditis paralogs.
Article in Genes, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular Evolution of Ultraviolet Visual Opsins and Spectral Tuning of Photoreceptors in Anemonefishes (Amphiprioninae).Genome biology and evolution · 2021Article
- Genomic Environment Impacts Color Vision Evolution in a Family with Visually Based Sexual Selection.Genome biology and evolution · 2017Article
- Early evolutionary history and genomic features of gene duplicates in the human genome.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- Ancestral duplications and highly dynamic opsin gene evolution in percomorph fishes.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015Article
- Extensive copy-number variation of young genes across stickleback populations.PLoS genetics · 2014Article
- Copy-number changes in evolution: rates, fitness effects and adaptive significance.Frontiers in genetics · 2013Review
- To the beat of a different drum: determinants implicated in the asymmetric sequence divergence of Caenorhabditis elegans paralogs.BMC evolutionary biology · 2013Article
- In with the old, in with the new: the promiscuity of the duplication process engenders diverse pathways for novel gene creation.International journal of evolutionary biology · 2012Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Interlocus gene conversion, the nonreciprocal exchange of genetic material between genes, is facilitated by high levels of sequence identity between DNA sequences and has the dual effect of homogenizing intergenic sequences while increasing intragenic variation. Gene conversion can have important consequences for the evolution of paralogs subsequent to gene duplication, as well as result in misinterpretations regarding their evolution. We review the current state of research on gene conversion in paralogs within Caenorhabditis elegans and its congeneric species, including the relative rates of gene conversion, the range of observable conversion tracts, the genomic variables that strongly influence the frequency of gene conversion and its contribution to concerted evolution of multigene families. Additionally, we discuss recent studies that examine the phenotypic and population-genetic effects of interlocus gene conversion between the sex-determination locus fog-2 and its paralog ftr-1 in natural and experimental populations of C. elegans. In light of the limitations of gene conversion detection methods that rely solely on the statistical distribution of identical nucleotides between paralogs, we suggest that analyses of gene conversion in C. elegans take advantage of mutation accumulation experiments and sequencing projects of related Caenorhabditis species.
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.