ArticleGenome biology and evolution2025
Comparing Small and Large Genomes Within Monogonont Rotifers.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genome size is an important correlate of many biological features including body size, metabolic rate, and developmental rate and can vary due to a variety of mechanisms, including incorporation of repetitive elements, duplication events, or reduction due to selective constraints. Our ability to understand the causes of genome size variation is hampered by limited sampling of many nonmodel taxa, including monogonont rotifers. Here, we used high-throughput Nanopore sequencing and flow cytometry to estimate genome sizes of nine species of monogonont rotifers representing seven families, including three representatives of Superorder Gnesiotrocha. We annotated the genomes and classified the repetitive elements. We also compared genome size with two biological features: body size and metabolic rate. Body sizes were obtained from the literature and our estimates. Oxygen consumption was used as a proxy for metabolic rate and was determined using a respirometer. We obtained similar genome size estimates from genome assemblies and flow cytometry, which were positively correlated with body size and size-specific respiration rate. Importantly, we determined that genome size variation is not due to increased numbers of repetitive elements or large regions of duplication. Instead, we observed higher numbers of predicted proteins as genome size increased, but currently many have no known function. Our results substantially expand the taxonomic scope of available genomes for Rotifera and provide opportunities for addressing genetic mechanisms underlying evolutionary and ecological processes in the phylum.
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.