Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41026699›Full record

ArticlePloS one2025

Is the extreme within-population genome size variation real in Spodoptera frugiperda?

Karine Durand, Kiwoong Nam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Karine DurandDGIMI, INRAE, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.ORCID 0000-0001-6518-8401
Kiwoong NamDGIMI, INRAE, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.ORCID 0000-0003-3194-8673

Funding

Nicolas Nègre and Emmanuelle d’AlençonSanté des Plantes et Environnement at Institut national de recherche pour l’agriculture, l’alimentation et l’environnement (Resistome)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome size variation is one of the main topics in evolutionary genomics. Recent studies in Spodoptera frugiperda (Insect; Lepidoptera) reported very striking results, including large genome size differences, up to a twofold variation within populations, with the existence of 1.37 Gb of non-reference genome sequences, which is 2.5 times larger than the reference genome, 544 Mb in size. These reports raise the question of whether such extreme genome size variations within populations can be biologically realistic. To evaluate these results, we analyzed reference genome assemblies and resequencing datasets from multiple independent studies, including those from the original research. We observed that high-quality reference genomes consistently range from 380 Mb to 390 Mb, aligning closely with flow cytometry measurements. The genome size estimates using k-mer-based approaches from field-collected samples across four independent studies suggest that extensive genome size variation within S. frugiperda is unlikely to occur. Additionally, genome size appears to have remained stable for at least 15.89 million years in the ancestral lineage of S. frugiperda. Taken together, these results do not support the existence of extreme genome size variation in S. frugiperda, emphasizing the need for careful validation.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationGenome, InsectGenome SizeSpodopteraAnimalsGenomics

Identifiers

PMID41026699
PMCPMC12483198

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.