Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27019725›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2015

Are microbes fundamentally different than macroorganisms? Convergence and a possible case for neutral phenotypic evolution in testate amoeba (Amoebozoa: Arcellinida).

Angela M Oliverio, Daniel J G Lahr, Jessica Grant, Laura A Katz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2015. 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. 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.

Angela M OliverioDepartment of Biological Sciences Smith College Northampton, MA 01063, USA.
Daniel J G LahrDepartment of Zoology, Institute of Biosciences University of São Paulo São Paulo 05508-090, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0002-1049-0635
Jessica GrantDepartment of Biological Sciences Smith College Northampton, MA 01063, USA.
Laura A KatzDepartment of Biological SciencesSmith CollegeNorthampton, MA 01063, USA; Graduate Program in Organismic and Evolutionary BiologyUniversity of MassachusettsAmherst, MA 01003, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study reveals extensive phenotypic convergence based on the non-monophyly of genera and morphospecies of testate (shelled) amoebae. Using two independent markers, small subunit ribosomal DNA (ssu-rDNA) and mitochondrial cytochrome oxidase I (COI), we demonstrate discordance between morphology and molecules for 'core Nebela' species (Arcellinida; Amoebozoa). Prior work using just a single locus, ssu-rDNA, also supported the non-monophyly of the genera Hyalosphenia and Nebela as well as for several morphospecies within these genera. Here, we obtained COI gene sequences of 59 specimens from seven morphospecies and ssu-rDNA gene sequences of 50 specimens from six morphospecies of hyalosphenids. Our analyses corroborate the prior ssu-rDNA findings of morphological convergence in test (shell) morphologies, as COI and ssu-rDNA phylogenies are concordant. Further, the monophyly of morphospecies is rejected using approximately unbiased tests. Given that testate amoebae are used as bioindicators in both palaeoecological and contemporary studies of threatened ecosystems such as bogs and fens, understanding the discordance between morphology and genetics in the hyalosphenids is essential for interpretation of indicator species. Further, while convergence is normally considered the result of natural selection, it is possible that neutrality underlies phenotypic evolution in these microorganisms.

Indexed as

arcellinidaconvergencecryptic speciessextestate amoebaetubulinea

Identifiers

PMID27019725
PMCPMC4807447

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.