ArticlePlant cell reports2016
Ancestral and more recently acquired syntenic relationships of MADS-box genes uncovered by the Physcomitrella patens pseudochromosomal genome assembly.
Article in Plant cell reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Survey of MIKC Type MADS-Box Genes in Non-seed Plants: Algae, Bryophytes, Lycophytes and Ferns.Frontiers in plant science · 2018Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
key messageThe Physcomitrella pseudochromosomal genome assembly revealed previously invisible synteny enabling realisation of the full potential of shared synteny as a tool for probing evolution of this plant's MADS-box gene family. Assembly of the sequenced genome of Physcomitrella patens into 27 mega-scaffolds (pseudochromosomes) has confirmed the major predictions of our earlier model of expansion of the MADS-box gene family in the Physcomitrella lineage. Additionally, microsynteny has been conserved in the immediate vicinity of some recent duplicates of MADS-box genes. However, comparison of non-syntenic MIKC MADS-box genes and neighbouring genes indicates that chromosomal rearrangements and/or sequence degeneration have destroyed shared synteny over longer distances (macrosynteny) around MADS-box genes despite subsets comprising two or three MIKC genes having remained syntenic. In contrast, half of the type I MADS-box genes have been transposed creating new syntenic relations with MIKC genes. This implies that conservation of ancient ancestral synteny of MIKC genes and of more recently acquired synteny of type I and MIKC genes may be selectively advantageous. Our revised model predicts the birth rate of MIKC genes in Physcomitrella is higher than that of type I genes. However, this difference is attributable to an early tandem duplication and an early segmental duplication of MIKC genes prior to the two polyploidisations that account for most of the expansion of the MADS-box gene family in Physcomitrella. Furthermore, this early segmental duplication spawned two chromosomal lineages: one with a MIKC (C) gene, belonging to the PPM2 clade, in close proximity to one or a pair of MIKC* genes and another with a MIKC (C) gene, belonging to the PpMADS-S clade, characterised by greater separation from syntenic MIKC* genes. Our model has evolutionary implications for the Physcomitrella karyotype.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26573679What 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.