Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29443885›Full record

ReviewGenes2018

Genome Size Diversity and Its Impact on the Evolution of Land Plants.

Jaume Pellicer, Oriane Hidalgo, Steven Dodsworth, Ilia J Leitch

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 160 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
160citing 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

160 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Nuclear genome profiling of two species ofNAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

100 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

4 authors.

Jaume PellicerDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew TW9 3DS, UK. j.pellicer@kew.org.ORCID 0000-0001-7632-9775
Oriane HidalgoDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew TW9 3DS, UK. o.hidalgo@kew.org.
Steven DodsworthDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew TW9 3DS, UK. s.dodsworth@kew.org.
Ilia J LeitchDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew TW9 3DS, UK. i.leitch@kew.org.ORCID 0000-0002-3837-8186

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome size is a biodiversity trait that shows staggering diversity across eukaryotes, varying over 64,000-fold. Of all major taxonomic groups, land plants stand out due to their staggering genome size diversity, ranging ca. 2400-fold. As our understanding of the implications and significance of this remarkable genome size diversity in land plants grows, it is becoming increasingly evident that this trait plays not only an important role in shaping the evolution of plant genomes, but also in influencing plant community assemblages at the ecosystem level. Recent advances and improvements in novel sequencing technologies, as well as analytical tools, make it possible to gain critical insights into the genomic and epigenetic mechanisms underpinning genome size changes. In this review we provide an overview of our current understanding of genome size diversity across the different land plant groups, its implications on the biology of the genome and what future directions need to be addressed to fill key knowledge gaps.

Indexed as

C-valuegenome sizegiant genomepolyploidytransposable elements

Identifiers

PMID29443885
PMCPMC5852584

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.