Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29230027›Full record

ArticleNature ecology & evolution2018

Genome of the Tasmanian tiger provides insights into the evolution and demography of an extinct marsupial carnivore.

Charles Y Feigin, Axel H Newton, Liliya Doronina, Jürgen Schmitz, Christy A Hipsley, Kieren J Mitchell, Graham Gower, Bastien Llamas, Julien Soubrier, Thomas N Heider and 4 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature ecology & evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
16.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 127 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Unintentional rewilding: lessons for trophic rewilding from other forms of species introductions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2018
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Charles Y FeiginSchool of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4981-5254
Axel H NewtonSchool of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Liliya DoroninaInstitute of Experimental Pathology (ZMBE), University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Jürgen SchmitzInstitute of Experimental Pathology (ZMBE), University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Christy A HipsleySchool of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Kieren J MitchellAustralian Centre for Ancient DNA, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Graham GowerAustralian Centre for Ancient DNA, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6197-3872
Bastien LlamasAustralian Centre for Ancient DNA, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5550-9176
Julien SoubrierAustralian Centre for Ancient DNA, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Thomas N HeiderInstitute for Systems Genomics and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA.
Brandon R MenziesSchool of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.
Alan CooperAustralian Centre for Ancient DNA, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7738-7851
Rachel J O'NeillInstitute for Systems Genomics and Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA.
Andrew J PaskSchool of BioSciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. ajpask@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1900-2263
The University of Adelaide · AUThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity of Connecticut · USUniversity of Münster · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Tasmanian tiger or thylacine (Thylacinus cynocephalus) was the largest carnivorous Australian marsupial to survive into the modern era. Despite last sharing a common ancestor with the eutherian canids ~160 million years ago, their phenotypic resemblance is considered the most striking example of convergent evolution in mammals. The last known thylacine died in captivity in 1936 and many aspects of the evolutionary history of this unique marsupial apex predator remain unknown. Here we have sequenced the genome of a preserved thylacine pouch young specimen to clarify the phylogenetic position of the thylacine within the carnivorous marsupials, reconstruct its historical demography and examine the genetic basis of its convergence with canids. Retroposon insertion patterns placed the thylacine as the basal lineage in Dasyuromorphia and suggest incomplete lineage sorting in early dasyuromorphs. Demographic analysis indicated a long-term decline in genetic diversity starting well before the arrival of humans in Australia. In spite of their extraordinary phenotypic convergence, comparative genomic analyses demonstrated that amino acid homoplasies between the thylacine and canids are largely consistent with neutral evolution. Furthermore, the genes and pathways targeted by positive selection differ markedly between these species. Together, these findings support models of adaptive convergence driven primarily by cis-regulatory evolution.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenomeAnimalsAustraliaDemographyMarsupialiaPhylogenySequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID29230027
OpenAlexW2774331694

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.