ArticleGenes2021
Quantitative Approach to Fish Cytogenetics in the Context of Vertebrate Genome Evolution.
Article in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long-read de novo genome assembly of Gulf toadfish (Opsanus beta).BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Abandoning the Isochore Theory Can Help Explain Genome Compositional Organization in Fish.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Advances in Vertebrate (Cyto)Genomics Shed New Light on Fish Compositional Genome Evolution.Genes · 2023Article
- Why Do Some Vertebrates Have Microchromosomes?Cells · 2021Review
- Fish Cytogenetics: Present and Future.Genes · 2021Article
- GC and Repeats Profiling along Chromosomes-The Future of Fish Compositional Cytogenomics.Genes · 2020Article
- Present and Future Salmonid Cytogenetics.Genes · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Our novel Python-based tool EVANGELIST allows the visualization of GC and repeats percentages along chromosomes in sequenced genomes and has enabled us to perform quantitative large-scale analyses on the chromosome level in fish and other vertebrates. This is a different approach from the prevailing analyses, i.e., analyses of GC% in the coding sequences that make up not more than 2% in human. We identified GC content (GC%) elevations in microchromosomes in ancient fish lineages similar to avian microchromosomes and a large variability in the relationship between the chromosome size and their GC% across fish lineages. This raises the question as to what extent does the chromosome size drive GC% as posited by the currently accepted explanation based on the recombination rate. We ascribe the differences found across fishes to varying GC% of repetitive sequences. Generally, our results suggest that the GC% of repeats and proportion of repeats are independent of the chromosome size. This leaves an open space for another mechanism driving the GC evolution in vertebrates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.