Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25274549›Full record

ArticleAnnals of botany2014

Evolution of genome size and chromosome number in the carnivorous plant genus Genlisea (Lentibulariaceae), with a new estimate of the minimum genome size in angiosperms.

Andreas Fleischmann, Todd P Michael, Fernando Rivadavia, Aretuza Sousa, Wenqin Wang, Eva M Temsch, Johann Greilhuber, Kai F Müller, Günther Heubl

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of botany, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed
14.9field-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

58 citing papers in PubMed, 136 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. A Brief Overview of the Epigenetic Regulatory Mechanisms in Plants.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Genome size variation withinEcology and evolution · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Mining theFrontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Reference standards for flow cytometric estimation of absolute nuclear DNA content in plants.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2022
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Andreas FleischmannDepartment of Biology, Systematic Botany and Mycology and Geo-Bio Center LMU, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Menzinger Strasse 67, D 80638 Munich, Germany fleischmann@lrz.uni-muenchen.de.
Todd P MichaelWaksman Institute of Microbiology, Rutgers University, 190 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.
Fernando Rivadavia1 Daniel Burnham Ct, San Francisco, CA 94109, USA.
Aretuza SousaDepartment of Biology, Systematic Botany and Mycology and Geo-Bio Center LMU, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Menzinger Strasse 67, D 80638 Munich, Germany.
Wenqin WangWaksman Institute of Microbiology, Rutgers University, 190 Frelinghuysen Road, Piscataway, NJ 08854, USA.
Eva M TemschDepartment of Botany and Biodiversity Research, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, A 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Johann GreilhuberDepartment of Botany and Biodiversity Research, Faculty of Life Sciences, University of Vienna, Rennweg 14, A 1030 Vienna, Austria.
Kai F MüllerInstitute for Evolution and Biodiversity, University of Muenster, Hüfferstrasse 1, D 48149 Münster, Germany.
Günther HeublDepartment of Biology, Systematic Botany and Mycology and Geo-Bio Center LMU, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Menzinger Strasse 67, D 80638 Munich, Germany.
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DERutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USUniversity of Vienna · ATUniversity of Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsSome species of Genlisea possess ultrasmall nuclear genomes, the smallest known among angiosperms, and some have been found to have chromosomes of diminutive size, which may explain why chromosome numbers and karyotypes are not known for the majority of species of the genus. However, other members of the genus do not possess ultrasmall genomes, nor do most taxa studied in related genera of the family or order. This study therefore examined the evolution of genome sizes and chromosome numbers in Genlisea in a phylogenetic context. The correlations of genome size with chromosome number and size, with the phylogeny of the group and with growth forms and habitats were also examined.

methodsNuclear genome sizes were measured from cultivated plant material for a comprehensive sampling of taxa, including nearly half of all species of Genlisea and representing all major lineages. Flow cytometric measurements were conducted in parallel in two laboratories in order to compare the consistency of different methods and controls. Chromosome counts were performed for the majority of taxa, comparing different staining techniques for the ultrasmall chromosomes. KEY

resultsGenome sizes of 15 taxa of Genlisea are presented and interpreted in a phylogenetic context. A high degree of congruence was found between genome size distribution and the major phylogenetic lineages. Ultrasmall genomes with 1C values of <100 Mbp were almost exclusively found in a derived lineage of South American species. The ancestral haploid chromosome number was inferred to be n = 8. Chromosome numbers in Genlisea ranged from 2n = 2x = 16 to 2n = 4x = 32. Ascendant dysploid series (2n = 36, 38) are documented for three derived taxa. The different ploidy levels corresponded to the two subgenera, but were not directly correlated to differences in genome size; the three different karyotype ranges mirrored the different sections of the genus. The smallest known plant genomes were not found in G. margaretae, as previously reported, but in G. tuberosa (1C ≈ 61 Mbp) and some strains of G. aurea (1C ≈ 64 Mbp).

conclusionsGenlisea is an ideal candidate model organism for the understanding of genome reduction as the genus includes species with both relatively large (∼1700 Mbp) and ultrasmall (∼61 Mbp) genomes. This comparative, phylogeny-based analysis of genome sizes and karyotypes in Genlisea provides essential data for selection of suitable species for comparative whole-genome analyses, as well as for further studies on both the molecular and cytogenetic basis of genome reduction in plants.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenome SizeChromosomes, PlantGenome, PlantKaryotypingMagnoliopsidaMetaphasePhotosynthesisPhylogenyPollenStaining and LabelingBladderwortcarnivorous plantchromosome numberflow cytometryGenliseagenome miniaturizationgenome sizeLamialesLentibulariaceae

Identifiers

PMID25274549
PMCPMC4649684
OpenAlexW2314991621

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.