Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31558833›Full record

ArticleNature ecology & evolution2019

Convergent evolution of a vertebrate-like methylome in a marine sponge.

Alex de Mendoza, William L Hatleberg, Kevin Pang, Sven Leininger, Ozren Bogdanovic, Jahnvi Pflueger, Sam Buckberry, Ulrich Technau, Andreas Hejnol, Maja Adamska and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature ecology & evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing 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

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Integration of epigenetics into ecotoxicology: insights and fundamental research needs.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  3. DNA methylation in invertebrate genomes and cell lineage plasticity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Stable Laboratory Culture System for the Ctenophore Mnemiopsis leidyi.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  17. DNA Methylation in Ctenophores.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024
    Article
  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

13 authors.

Alex de MendozaAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, School of Molecular Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. alex.demendoza@uwa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6441-6529
William L HatlebergSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0423-7123
Kevin PangSars International Centre for Marine Molecular Biology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Sven LeiningerSars International Centre for Marine Molecular Biology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Ozren BogdanovicGenomics and Epigenetics Division, Garvan Institute of Medical Research, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Jahnvi PfluegerAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, School of Molecular Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.
Sam BuckberryAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, School of Molecular Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2388-6046
Ulrich TechnauDepartment for Molecular Evolution and Development, Centre of Organismal Systems Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4472-8258
Andreas HejnolSars International Centre for Marine Molecular Biology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2196-8507
Maja AdamskaSars International Centre for Marine Molecular Biology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Bernard M DegnanSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7573-8518
Sandie M DegnanSchool of Biological Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8003-0426
Ryan ListerAustralian Research Council Centre of Excellence in Plant Energy Biology, School of Molecular Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia. ryan.lister@uwa.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6637-7239

Funding

European Research Council 648861
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vertebrates have highly methylated genomes at CpG positions, whereas invertebrates have sparsely methylated genomes. This increase in methylation content is considered a major regulatory innovation of vertebrate genomes. However, here we report that a sponge, proposed as the potential sister group to the rest of animals, has a highly methylated genome. Despite major differences in genome size and architecture, we find similarities between the independent acquisitions of the hypermethylated state. Both lineages show genome-wide CpG depletion, conserved strong transcription factor methyl-sensitivity and developmental methylation dynamics at 5-hydroxymethylcytosine enriched regions. Together, our findings trace back patterns associated with DNA methylation in vertebrates to the early steps of animal evolution. Thus, the sponge methylome challenges previous hypotheses concerning the uniqueness of vertebrate genome hypermethylation and its implications for regulatory complexity.

Indexed as

EpigenomePoriferaAnimalsDNA MethylationInvertebratesVertebrates

Identifiers

PMID31558833
PMCPMC6783312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.