ArticlePloS one2017
Network Centrality Analysis in Fungi Reveals Complex Regulation of Lost and Gained Genes.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The microprotein Nrs1 rewires the G1/S transcriptional machinery during nitrogen limitation in budding yeast.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- Mechanisms coordinating ribosomal protein gene transcription in response to stress.Nucleic acids research · 2020Article
- Patterns of Conservation and Diversification in the Fungal Polarization Network.Genome biology and evolution · 2018Article
- Towards a Dynamic Interaction Network of Life to unify and expand the evolutionary theory.BMC biology · 2018Review
- A High-Resolution Genome-Wide CRISPR/Cas9 Viability Screen Reveals Structural Features and Contextual Diversity of the Human Cell-Essential Proteome.Molecular and cellular biology · 2018Article
- Metanetwork Transmission Model for Predicting a Malaria-Control Strategy.Frontiers in genetics · 2018Article
- Introns provide a platform for intergenic regulatory feedback of RPL22 paralogs in yeast.PloS one · 2018Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gene gain and loss shape both proteomes and the networks they form. The increasing availability of closely related sequenced genomes and of genome-wide network data should enable a better understanding of the evolutionary forces driving gene gain, gene loss and evolutionary network rewiring. Using orthology mappings across 23 ascomycete fungi genomes, we identified proteins that were lost, gained or universally conserved across the tree, enabling us to compare genes across all stages of their life-cycle. Based on a collection of genome-wide network and gene expression datasets from baker's yeast, as well as a few from fission yeast, we found that gene loss is more strongly associated with network and expression features of closely related species than that of distant species, consistent with the evolutionary modulation of gene loss propensity through network rewiring. We also discovered that lost and gained genes, as compared to universally conserved "core" genes, have more regulators, more complex expression patterns and are much more likely to encode for transcription factors. Finally, we found that the relative rate of network integration of new genes into the different types of networks agrees with experimentally measured rates of network rewiring. This systems-level view of the life-cycle of eukaryotic genes suggests that the gain and loss of genes is tightly coupled to the gain and loss of network interactions, that lineage-specific adaptations drive regulatory complexity and that the relative rates of integration of new genes are consistent with network rewiring rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.