Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30890027›Full record

ReviewOpen biology2019

A battle for transmission: the cooperative and selfish animal mitochondrial genomes.

Anna Klucnika, Hansong Ma

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Open biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Stochastic survival of the densest and mitochondrial DNA clonal expansion in aging.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anna Klucnika1 Wellcome Trust/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute , Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1QN , UK.
Hansong Ma1 Wellcome Trust/Cancer Research UK Gurdon Institute , Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1QN , UK.
University of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 202269/Z/16/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The mitochondrial genome is an evolutionarily persistent and cooperative component of metazoan cells that contributes to energy production and many other cellular processes. Despite sharing the same host as the nuclear genome, the multi-copy mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) follows very different rules of replication and transmission, which translate into differences in the patterns of selection. On one hand, mtDNA is dependent on the host for its transmission, so selections would favour genomes that boost organismal fitness. On the other hand, genetic heterogeneity within an individual allows different mitochondrial genomes to compete for transmission. This intra-organismal competition could select for the best replicator, which does not necessarily give the fittest organisms, resulting in mito-nuclear conflict. In this review, we discuss the recent advances in our understanding of the mechanisms and opposing forces governing mtDNA transmission and selection in bilaterians, and what the implications of these are for mtDNA evolution and mitochondrial replacement therapy.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularSelection, GeneticAnimalsDNA, MitochondrialGenes, MitochondrialGenetic FitnessGenome, MitochondrialHumansMitochondrial DiseasesMutationDNA, Mitochondrialheteroplasmymitochondrial DNAmitochondrial replacement therapypurifying selectionselfish selection

Identifiers

PMID30890027
PMCPMC6451365
OpenAlexW2924115024

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.