Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30380054›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2018

Comparative Genomics Supports Sex and Meiosis in Diverse Amoebozoa.

Paulo G Hofstatter, Matthew W Brown, Daniel J G Lahr

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 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. Frontiers in microbiology · 2022
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

3 authors.

Paulo G HofstatterDepartamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.
Matthew W BrownDepartment of Biological Sciences, Mississippi State University.
Daniel J G LahrDepartamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de São Paulo, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sex and reproduction are often treated as a single phenomenon in animals and plants, as in these organisms reproduction implies mixis and meiosis. In contrast, sex and reproduction are independent biological phenomena that may or may not be linked in the majority of other eukaryotes. Current evidence supports a eukaryotic ancestor bearing a mating type system and meiosis, which is a process exclusive to eukaryotes. Even though sex is ancestral, the literature regarding life cycles of amoeboid lineages depicts them as asexual organisms. Why would loss of sex be common in amoebae, if it is rarely lost, if ever, in plants and animals, as well as in fungi? One way to approach the question of meiosis in the "asexuals" is to evaluate the patterns of occurrence of genes for the proteins involved in syngamy and meiosis. We have applied a comparative genomic approach to study the occurrence of the machinery for plasmogamy, karyogamy, and meiosis in Amoebozoa, a major amoeboid supergroup. Our results support a putative occurrence of syngamy and meiotic processes in all major amoebozoan lineages. We conclude that most amoebozoans may perform mixis, recombination, and ploidy reduction through canonical meiotic processes. The present evidence indicates the possibility of sexual cycles in many lineages traditionally held as asexual.

Indexed as

Genome, ProtozoanMeiosisAmoebozoaGenomicsRecombination, GeneticSex

Identifiers

PMID30380054
PMCPMC6263441

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.