Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24803571›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2014

Selection on horizontally transferred and duplicated genes in sinorhizobium (ensifer), the root-nodule symbionts of medicago.

Brendan Epstein, Michael J Sadowsky, Peter Tiffin

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Brendan EpsteinDepartment of Plant Biology, University of MinnesotaSchool of Biological Sciences, Washington State University brendan.epstein@wsu.edu ptiffin@umn.edu.
Michael J SadowskyDepartment of Soil, Water, and Climate, University of MinnesotaBioTechnology Institute, Saint Paul, MN.
Peter TiffinDepartment of Plant Biology, University of Minnesota brendan.epstein@wsu.edu ptiffin@umn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Structural variation, including variation in gene copy number and presence or absence of genes, is a widespread and important source of genomic variation. We used whole-genome DNA sequences from 48 strains of Sinorhizobium (recently renamed Ensifer), including 20 strains of Sinorhizobium meliloti and 12 strains of S. medicae that were the focus of the analyses, to study the fitness effects of new structural variants created by duplication and horizontal gene transfer. We find that derived duplicated and horizontally transferred (HT) genes segregate at lower frequency than synonymous and nonsynonymous nucleotide variants in S. meliloti and S. medicae. Furthermore, the relative frequencies of different types of variants are more similar in S. medicae than in S. meliloti, the species with the larger effective population size. These results are consistent with the hypothesis that most duplications and HT genes have deleterious effects. Diversity of duplications, as measured by segregating duplicated genes per gene, is greater than nucleotide diversity, consistent with a high rate of duplication. Our results suggest that the vast majority of structural variants found among closely related bacterial strains are short-lived and unlikely to be involved in species-wide adaptation.

Indexed as

Genes, DuplicateGene Transfer, HorizontalSelection, GeneticGene FrequencyGenetic FitnessGenetic VariationGenome, BacterialMedicagoPolymorphism, Single NucleotideRoot Nodules, PlantSinorhizobium melilotiSymbiosisfitness effectsmutationpangenomepurifying selectionstructural variation

Identifiers

PMID24803571
PMCPMC4040998

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.