Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26873616›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of eukaryotic microbiology2016

Kin Discrimination in Protists: From Many Cells to Single Cells and Backwards.

Guillermo Paz-Y-Miño-C, Avelina Espinosa

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of eukaryotic microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

2 authors.

Guillermo Paz-Y-Miño-CNew England Center for the Public Understanding of Science, Roger Williams University, One Old Ferry Road, Bristol, Rhode Island, 02809.
Avelina EspinosaNew England Center for the Public Understanding of Science, Roger Williams University, One Old Ferry Road, Bristol, Rhode Island, 02809.

Funding

Training CoreP20GM103430 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND · PI Bongsup P Cho · 2012 to 2026
$63.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103430
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During four decades (1960-1990s), the conceptualization and experimental design of studies in kin recognition relied on work with multicellular eukaryotes, particularly Unikonta (including invertebrates and vertebrates) and some Bikonta (including plants). This pioneering research had an animal behavior approach. During the 2000s, work on taxa-, clone- and kin-discrimination and recognition in protists produced genetic and molecular evidence that unicellular organisms (e.g. Saccharomyces, Dictyostelium, Polysphondylium, Tetrahymena, Entamoeba and Plasmodium) could distinguish between same (self or clone) and different (diverse clones), as well as among conspecifics of close or distant genetic relatedness. Here, we discuss some of the research on the genetics of kin discrimination/recognition and highlight the scientific progress made by switching emphasis from investigating multicellular to unicellular systems (and backwards). We document how studies with protists are helping us to understand the microscopic, cellular origins and evolution of the mechanisms of kin discrimination/recognition and their significance for the advent of multicellularity. We emphasize that because protists are among the most ancient organisms on Earth, belong to multiple taxonomic groups and occupy all environments, they can be central to reexamining traditional hypotheses in the field of kin recognition, reformulating concepts, and generating new knowledge.

Indexed as

AllelesAnimalsBiological EvolutionEukaryotaGenetic FitnessPhenotypeAntirecognition strategiescheaters and resisterscommunication problemgreen-beard effecthonest signalsinclusive fitnesskin selectionphenotype matchingrecognition alleles

Identifiers

PMID26873616
PMCPMC4856593

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.