Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32354058›Full record

ArticleGenes2020

Comparative Cytogenetic Mapping and Telomere Analysis Provide Evolutionary Predictions for Devil Facial Tumour 2.

Emory D Ingles, Janine E Deakin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Emory D InglesInstitute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia.
Janine E DeakinInstitute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2617, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1259-3531

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The emergence of a second transmissible tumour in the Tasmanian devil population, devil facial tumour 2 (DFT2), has prompted questions on the origin and evolution of these transmissible tumours. We used a combination of cytogenetic mapping and telomere length measurements to predict the evolutionary trajectory of chromosome rearrangements in DFT2. Gene mapping by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) provided insight into the chromosome rearrangements in DFT2 and identified the evolution of two distinct DFT2 lineages. A comparison of devil facial tumour 1 (DFT1) and DFT2 chromosome rearrangements indicated that both started with the fusion of a chromosome, with potentially critically short telomeres, to chromosome 1 to form dicentric chromosomes. In DFT1, the dicentric chromosome resulted in breakage-fusion-bridge cycles leading to highly rearranged chromosomes. In contrast, the silencing of a centromere on the dicentric chromosome in DFT2 stabilized the chromosome, resulting in a less rearranged karyotype than DFT1. DFT2 retains a bimodal distribution of telomere length dimorphism observed on Tasmanian devil chromosomes, a feature lost in DFT1. Using long term cell culture, we observed homogenization of telomere length over time. We predict a similar homogenization of telomere lengths occurred in DFT1, and that DFT2 is unlikely to undergo further substantial rearrangements due to maintained telomere length.

Indexed as

AnimalsFacial NeoplasmsHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceKaryotypeKaryotypingMarsupialiaTelomereTelomere Homeostasischromosome rearrangementdevil facial tumour diseaseDNA methylationtelomere

Identifiers

PMID32354058
PMCPMC7290341

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.