Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25591920›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2015

Evolutionary consequences of DNA methylation on the GC content in vertebrate genomes.

Carina F Mugal, Peter F Arndt, Lena Holm, Hans Ellegren

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Why recombination hotspots?PLoS genetics · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Insight into the Epigenetics of Kaposi's Sarcoma-Associated Herpesvirus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Single-Cell DNA Methylation Analysis of Chicken Lampbrush Chromosomes.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Carina F MugalDepartment of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University, SE-752 36 Uppsala, Sweden carina.mugal@ebc.uu.se.
Peter F ArndtDepartment of Computational Molecular Biology, Max Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics, DE-14195 Berlin, Germany.
Lena HolmDepartment of Anatomy, Physiology and Biochemistry, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, SE-756 51 Uppsala, Sweden.
Hans EllegrenDepartment of Ecology and Genetics, Uppsala University, SE-752 36 Uppsala, Sweden.
Uppsala University · SEMax Planck Institute for Molecular Genetics · DESwedish University of Agricultural Sciences · SE

Funding

European Research Council 249976
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The genomes of many vertebrates show a characteristic variation in GC content. To explain its origin and evolution, mainly three mechanisms have been proposed: selection for GC content, mutation bias, and GC-biased gene conversion. At present, the mechanism of GC-biased gene conversion, i.e., short-scale, unidirectional exchanges between homologous chromosomes in the neighborhood of recombination-initiating double-strand breaks in favor for GC nucleotides, is the most widely accepted hypothesis. We here suggest that DNA methylation also plays an important role in the evolution of GC content in vertebrate genomes. To test this hypothesis, we investigated one mammalian (human) and one avian (chicken) genome. We used bisulfite sequencing to generate a whole-genome methylation map of chicken sperm and made use of a publicly available whole-genome methylation map of human sperm. Inclusion of these methylation maps into a model of GC content evolution provided significant support for the impact of DNA methylation on the local equilibrium GC content. Moreover, two different estimates of equilibrium GC content, one that neglects and one that incorporates the impact of DNA methylation and the concomitant CpG hypermutability, give estimates that differ by approximately 15% in both genomes, arguing for a strong impact of DNA methylation on the evolution of GC content. Thus, our results put forward that previous estimates of equilibrium GC content, which neglect the hypermutability of CpG dinucleotides, need to be reevaluated.

Indexed as

Base CompositionDNA MethylationEvolution, MolecularGenome, HumanAnimalsChickensHumansCpG hypermutabilityDNA methylationGC-biased gene conversionGC contentGC isochores

Identifiers

PMID25591920
PMCPMC4349097
OpenAlexW2040351382

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.