ArticleSystematic biology2022
Species Tree Estimation and the Impact of Gene Loss Following Whole-Genome Duplication.
Article in Systematic biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unravelling Complex Hybrid and Polyploid Evolutionary Relationships Using Phylogenetic Placement of Homologous Gene Copies from Target Enrichment Data.Systematic biology · 2026Article
- Expanding the triangle of U: comparative analysis of the Hirschfeldia incana genome provides insights into chromosomal evolution, phylogenomics and high photosynthesis-related traits.Annals of botany · 2026Article
- Phylogenetic relationships and divergent evolution in Pueraria sensu stricto (Fabaceae) based on plastid genomes and nrITS sequences.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
- An updated phylogeny of Boraginales based on the Angiosperms353 probe set: a roadmap for understanding morphological evolution.Annals of botany · 2025Article
- A composite universal DNA signature for the tree of life.Nature ecology & evolution · 2025Article
- Lost in translation: What we have learned from attributes that do not translate from Arabidopsis to other plants.The Plant cell · 2025Review
- SOI: robust identification of orthologous synteny with the Orthology Index and broad applications in evolutionary genomics.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Genome sequencing of three Polyscias species reveals common features in terpene synthase gene family evolution in these species.The plant genome · 2025Article
- Phylogenomics of Neogastropoda: The Backbone Hidden in the Bush.Systematic biology · 2024Article
- Deciphering complex reticulate evolution of Asian Buddleja (Scrophulariaceae): insights into the taxonomy and speciation of polyploid taxa in the Sino-Himalayan region.Annals of botany · 2023Article
- Genomic Analysis of Plastid-Nuclear Interactions and Differential Evolution Rates in Coevolved Genes across Juglandaceae Species.Genome biology and evolution · 2023Article
- POInTBMC bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Potential allopolyploid origin of Ericales revealed with gene-tree reconciliation.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whole-genome duplication (WGD) occurs broadly and repeatedly across the history of eukaryotes and is recognized as a prominent evolutionary force, especially in plants. Immediately following WGD, most genes are present in two copies as paralogs. Due to this redundancy, one copy of a paralog pair commonly undergoes pseudogenization and is eventually lost. When speciation occurs shortly after WGD; however, differential loss of paralogs may lead to spurious phylogenetic inference resulting from the inclusion of pseudoorthologs-paralogous genes mistakenly identified as orthologs because they are present in single copies within each sampled species. The influence and impact of including pseudoorthologs versus true orthologs as a result of gene extinction (or incomplete laboratory sampling) are only recently gaining empirical attention in the phylogenomics community. Moreover, few studies have yet to investigate this phenomenon in an explicit coalescent framework. Here, using mathematical models, numerous simulated data sets, and two newly assembled empirical data sets, we assess the effect of pseudoorthologs on species tree estimation under varying degrees of incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) and differential gene loss scenarios following WGD. When gene loss occurs along the terminal branches of the species tree, alignment-based (BPP) and gene-tree-based (ASTRAL, MP-EST, and STAR) coalescent methods are adversely affected as the degree of ILS increases. This can be greatly improved by sampling a sufficiently large number of genes. Under the same circumstances, however, concatenation methods consistently estimate incorrect species trees as the number of genes increases. Additionally, pseudoorthologs can greatly mislead species tree inference when gene loss occurs along the internal branches of the species tree. Here, both coalescent and concatenation methods yield inconsistent results. These results underscore the importance of understanding the influence of pseudoorthologs in the phylogenomics era. [Coalescent method; concatenation method; incomplete lineage sorting; pseudoorthologs; single-copy gene; whole-genome duplication.].
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.