ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2025
Genomic divergence across the tree of life.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2025. 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.
- Article
- Genome-based reassessment ofCurrent research in microbial sciences · 2026Article
- A microbiologist's field guide to community ecology.ISME communications · 2026Review
- First molecular evidence ofVeterinary world · 2025Article
- Forty new genomes shed light on sexual reproduction and the origin of tetraploidy in Microsporidia.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- EvANI benchmarking workflow for evolutionary distance estimation.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Nucleotide sequence data are being harnessed to identify species, even in cases in which organisms themselves are neither in hand nor witnessed. But how genome-wide sequence divergence maps to species status is far from clear. While gene sequence divergence is commonly used to delineate bacterial species, its correspondence to established species boundaries has yet to be explored across eukaryotic taxa. Because the processes underlying gene flow differ fundamentally between prokaryotes and eukaryotes, these domains are likely to differ in the relationship between reproductive isolation and genome-wide sequence divergence. In prokaryotes, homologous recombination, the basis of gene flow, depends directly on the degree of genomic sequence divergence, whereas in sexually reproducing eukaryotes, reproductive incompatibility can stem from changes in very few genes. Guided by measures of genome-wide sequence divergence in bacteria, we gauge how genomic criteria correspond to species boundaries in eukaryotes. In recognized species of eukaryotes, levels of gene sequence divergence within species are typically very small, averaging <1% across protein-coding regions in most animals, plants, and fungi. There are even instances in which divergence between sister species is the same or less than that among conspecifics. In contrast, bacterial species, defined as populations exchanging homologous genes, show levels of divergence both within and between species that are considerably higher. Although no single threshold delineates species, eukaryotic populations with >1% genome-wide sequence divergence are likely separate species, whereas prokaryotic populations with 1% divergence are still able to recombine and thus can be considered the same species.
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.