ArticleGenome biology and evolution2022
Evolution of Complex Regulation for Cell-Cycle Control.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- System drift in the evolution of plant meristem development.PLoS genetics · 2026Article
- The potential of kaempferol in digestive system tumors: recent advances and mechanistic insights.Discover oncology · 2024Review
- Stability of ecologically scaffolded traits during evolutionary transitions in individuality.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Aurora kinase as a putative target to tick control.Parasitology · 2024Article
- Intracellular signaling in proto-eukaryotes evolves to alleviate regulatory conflicts of endosymbiosis.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Obligate endosymbiosis enables genome expansion during eukaryogenesis.Communications biology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many questions remain about the interplay between adaptive and neutral processes leading to genome expansion and the evolution of cellular complexity. Genome size appears to be tightly linked to the size of the regulatory repertoire of cells (van Nimwegen E. 2003. Scaling laws in the functional content of genomes. Trends Gen. 19(9):479-484). In the context of gene regulation, we here study the interplay between adaptive and nonadaptive forces on genome and regulatory network in a computational model of cell-cycle adaptation to different environments. Starting from the well-known Caulobacter crescentus network, we report on ten replicate in silico evolution experiments where cells evolve cell-cycle control by adapting to increasingly harsh spatial habitats. We find adaptive expansion of the regulatory repertoire of cells. Having a large genome is inherently costly, but also allows for improved cell-cycle behavior. Replicates traverse different evolutionary trajectories leading to distinct eco-evolutionary strategies. In four replicates, cells evolve a generalist strategy to cope with a variety of nutrient levels; in two replicates, different specialist cells evolve for specific nutrient levels; in the remaining four replicates, an intermediate strategy evolves. These diverse evolutionary outcomes reveal the role of contingency in a system under strong selective forces. This study shows that functionality of cells depends on the combination of regulatory network topology and genome organization. For example, the positions of dosage-sensitive genes are exploited to signal to the regulatory network when replication is completed, forming a de novo evolved cell cycle checkpoint. Our results underline the importance of the integration of multiple organizational levels to understand complex gene regulation and the evolution thereof.
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.