Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28424354›Full record

ArticleGenome research2017

Less effective selection leads to larger genomes.

Tristan Lefébure, Claire Morvan, Florian Malard, Clémentine François, Lara Konecny-Dupré, Laurent Guéguen, Michèle Weiss-Gayet, Andaine Seguin-Orlando, Luca Ermini, Clio Der Sarkissian and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing 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

45 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. 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

17 authors.

Tristan LefébureUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Claire MorvanUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Florian MalardUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Clémentine FrançoisUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Lara Konecny-DupréUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Laurent GuéguenUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Michèle Weiss-GayetUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5310, INSERM, Institut NeuroMyoGène, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Andaine Seguin-OrlandoCenter for GeoGenetics, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, 1350K Copenhagen, Denmark.
Luca ErminiCenter for GeoGenetics, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, 1350K Copenhagen, Denmark.
Clio Der SarkissianCenter for GeoGenetics, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, 1350K Copenhagen, Denmark.
N Pierre CharrierUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
David EmeUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Florian Mermillod-BlondinUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Laurent DuretUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Cristina VieiraUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5558, Laboratoire de Biométrie et Biologie Evolutive, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.
Ludovic OrlandoCenter for GeoGenetics, Natural History Museum of Denmark, University of Copenhagen, 1350K Copenhagen, Denmark.
Christophe Jean DouadyUniversité de Lyon, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS UMR 5023, ENTPE, Laboratoire d'Ecologie des Hydrosystèmes Naturels et Anthropisés, F-69622 Villeurbanne, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The evolutionary origin of the striking genome size variations found in eukaryotes remains enigmatic. The effective size of populations, by controlling selection efficacy, is expected to be a key parameter underlying genome size evolution. However, this hypothesis has proved difficult to investigate using empirical data sets. Here, we tested this hypothesis using 22 de novo transcriptomes and low-coverage genomes of asellid isopods, which represent 11 independent habitat shifts from surface water to resource-poor groundwater. We show that these habitat shifts are associated with higher transcriptome-wide [Formula: see text] After ruling out the role of positive selection and pseudogenization, we show that these transcriptome-wide [Formula: see text] increases are the consequence of a reduction in selection efficacy imposed by the smaller effective population size of subterranean species. This reduction is paralleled by an important increase in genome size (25% increase on average), an increase also confirmed in subterranean decapods and mollusks. We also control for an adaptive impact of genome size on life history traits but find no correlation between body size, or growth rate, and genome size. We show instead that the independent increases in genome size measured in subterranean isopods are the direct consequence of increasing invasion rates by repeat elements, which are less efficiently purged out by purifying selection. Contrary to selection efficacy, polymorphism is not correlated to genome size. We propose that recent demographic fluctuations and the difficulty of observing polymorphism variation in polymorphism-poor species can obfuscate the link between effective population size and genome size when polymorphism data are used alone.

Indexed as

Genetic SpeciationGenome SizePhylogenySelection, GeneticAnimalsDecapodaHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingIsopodaMicrosatellite RepeatsMolluscaPolymorphism, GeneticTranscriptome

Identifiers

PMID28424354
PMCPMC5453316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.