Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28839925›Full record

ReviewInterface focus2017

Extended genomes: symbiosis and evolution.

Gregory D D Hurst

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Interface focus, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Prophage-encodedeLife · 2025
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Two male-killingRoyal Society open science · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A generalised approach to the study and understanding of adaptive evolution.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Isolation, culture and characterization ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    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

1 author.

Gregory D D HurstInstitute of Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool L69 7ZB, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7163-7784

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many aspects of an individual's biology derive from its interaction with symbiotic microbes, which further define many aspects of the ecology and evolution of the host species. The centrality of microbes in the function of individual organisms has given rise to the concept of the holobiont-that an individual's biology is best understood as a composite of the 'host organism' and symbionts within. This concept has been further elaborated to posit the holobiont as a unit of selection. In this review, I critically examine whether it is useful to consider holobionts as a unit of selection. I argue that microbial heredity-the direct passage of microbes from parent to offspring-is a key factor determining the degree to which the holobiont can usefully be considered a level of selection. Where direct vertical transmission (VT) is common, microbes form part of extended genomes whose dynamics can be modelled with simple population genetics, but that nevertheless have subtle quantitative distinctions from the classic mutation/selection model for nuclear genes. Without direct VT, the correlation between microbial fitness and host individual fitness erodes, and microbe fitness becomes associated with host survival only (rather than reproduction). Furthermore, turnover of microbes within a host may lessen associations between microbial fitness with host survival, and in polymicrobial communities, microbial fitness may derive largely from the ability to outcompete other microbes, to avoid host immune clearance and to minimize mortality through phage infection. These competing selection pressures make holobiont fitness a very minor consideration in determining symbiont evolution. Nevertheless, the importance of non-heritable microbes in organismal function is undoubted-and as such the evolutionary and ecological processes giving rise to variation and evolution of the microbes within and between host individuals represent a key research area in biology.

Indexed as

extended evolutionary synthesishereditysymbiosis

Identifiers

PMID28839925
PMCPMC5566813

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.