Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32315410›Full record

ReviewGenome biology and evolution2020

Sex Chromosome Evolution: So Many Exceptions to the Rules.

Benjamin L S Furman, David C H Metzger, Iulia Darolti, Alison E Wright, Benjamin A Sandkam, Pedro Almeida, Jacelyn J Shu, Judith E Mank

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genome biology and evolution, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 129 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
129citing 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

129 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Rapid turnover of sex-determining architecture in invasive mussels.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. OligoY pipeline for full Y chromosome painting.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025
    Article
  20. Article

69 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

8 authors.

Benjamin L S FurmanBeaty Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
David C H MetzgerBeaty Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Iulia DaroltiBeaty Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Alison E WrightDepartment of Animal and Plant Sciences, University of Sheffield, United Kingdom.
Benjamin A SandkamBeaty Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Pedro AlmeidaDepartment of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, University College London, United Kingdom.
Jacelyn J ShuBeaty Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Judith E MankBeaty Biodiversity Research Centre, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genomic analysis of many nonmodel species has uncovered an incredible diversity of sex chromosome systems, making it possible to empirically test the rich body of evolutionary theory that describes each stage of sex chromosome evolution. Classic theory predicts that sex chromosomes originate from a pair of homologous autosomes and recombination between them is suppressed via inversions to resolve sexual conflict. The resulting degradation of the Y chromosome gene content creates the need for dosage compensation in the heterogametic sex. Sex chromosome theory also implies a linear process, starting from sex chromosome origin and progressing to heteromorphism. Despite many convergent genomic patterns exhibited by independently evolved sex chromosome systems, and many case studies supporting these theoretical predictions, emerging data provide numerous interesting exceptions to these long-standing theories, and suggest that the remarkable diversity of sex chromosomes is matched by a similar diversity in their evolution. For example, it is clear that sex chromosome pairs are not always derived from homologous autosomes. In addition, both the cause and the mechanism of recombination suppression between sex chromosome pairs remain unclear, and it may be that the spread of recombination suppression is a more gradual process than previously thought. It is also clear that dosage compensation can be achieved in many ways, and displays a range of efficacy in different systems. Finally, the remarkable turnover of sex chromosomes in many systems, as well as variation in the rate of sex chromosome divergence, suggest that assumptions about the inevitable linearity of sex chromosome evolution are not always empirically supported, and the drivers of the birth-death cycle of sex chromosome evolution remain to be elucidated. Here, we concentrate on how the diversity in sex chromosomes across taxa highlights an equal diversity in each stage of sex chromosome evolution.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionSex ChromosomesAnimalsChromosomes, PlantDosage Compensation, GeneticGenetic VariationRecombination, GeneticSelection, Geneticrecombination suppression, sex determination, inversions, methylation, dosage compensation

Identifiers

PMID32315410
PMCPMC7268786

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.