Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27288366›Full record

ReviewPlant physiology2016

Evolution of Gene Duplication in Plants.

Nicholas Panchy, Melissa Lehti-Shiu, Shin-Han Shiu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Plant physiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 907 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
907citing 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

907 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Genus-Wide Pan-Genome Analysis ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article

847 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Nicholas PanchyGenetics Program (N.P., S.-H.S.) and Department of Plant Biology (M.L.-S., S.-H.S.), Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824.ORCID 0000-0002-1551-3517
Melissa Lehti-ShiuGenetics Program (N.P., S.-H.S.) and Department of Plant Biology (M.L.-S., S.-H.S.), Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824.ORCID 0000-0003-1985-2687
Shin-Han ShiuGenetics Program (N.P., S.-H.S.) and Department of Plant Biology (M.L.-S., S.-H.S.), Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan 48824 shius@msu.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-6470-235X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ancient duplication events and a high rate of retention of extant pairs of duplicate genes have contributed to an abundance of duplicate genes in plant genomes. These duplicates have contributed to the evolution of novel functions, such as the production of floral structures, induction of disease resistance, and adaptation to stress. Additionally, recent whole-genome duplications that have occurred in the lineages of several domesticated crop species, including wheat (Triticum aestivum), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), and soybean (Glycine max), have contributed to important agronomic traits, such as grain quality, fruit shape, and flowering time. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms and impacts of gene duplication will be important to future studies of plants in general and of agronomically important crops in particular. In this review, we survey the current knowledge about gene duplication, including gene duplication mechanisms, the potential fates of duplicate genes, models explaining duplicate gene retention, the properties that distinguish duplicate from singleton genes, and the evolutionary impact of gene duplication.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene DuplicationGenome, PlantPhylogenyPlants

Identifiers

PMID27288366
PMCPMC4972278

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.