Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33984070›Full record

ArticlePloS one2021

Evolution of default genetic control mechanisms.

William Bains, Enrico Borriello, Dirk Schulze-Makuch

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 95% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

William BainsDepartment of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5503-3764
Enrico BorrielloSchool of Complex Adaptive Systems, College of Global Futures, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ, United States of America.
Dirk Schulze-MakuchZentrum für Astronomie und Astrophysik, Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Arizona State University · USLeibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries · DEMassachusetts Institute of Technology · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present a model of the evolution of control systems in a genome under environmental constraints. The model conceptually follows the Jacob and Monod model of gene control. Genes contain control elements which respond to the internal state of the cell as well as the environment to control expression of a coding region. Control and coding regions evolve to maximize a fitness function between expressed coding sequences and the environment. The model was run 118 times to an average of 1.4∙106 'generations' each with a range of starting parameters probed the conditions under which genomes evolved a 'default style' of control. Unexpectedly, the control logic that evolved was not significantly correlated to the complexity of the environment. Genetic logic was strongly correlated with genome complexity and with the fraction of genes active in the cell at any one time. More complex genomes correlated with the evolution of genetic controls in which genes were active ('default on'), and a low fraction of genes being expressed correlated with a genetic logic in which genes were biased to being inactive unless positively activated ('default off' logic). We discuss how this might relate to the evolution of the complex eukaryotic genome, which operates in a 'default off' mode.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene Expression RegulationModels, GeneticAnimalsGene-Environment InteractionGenomeHumans

Identifiers

PMID33984070
PMCPMC8118313
OpenAlexW3162716052

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.