Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 959

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The rainbow trout genome provides novel insights into evolution after whole-genome duplication in vertebrates

Open access
Berthelot, Camille, Brunet, Frédéric, Chalopin, Domitille, Juanchich, Amélie, Bernard, Maria, Noël, Benjamin, Bento, Pascal, Da Silva, Corinne, Labadie, Karine, Alberti, Adriana, Aury, Jean-Marc, Louis, Alexandra, Dehais, Patrice, Bardou, Philippe, Montfort, Jérôme, Klopp, Christophe, Cabau, Cédric, Gaspin, Christine, Thorgaard, Gary H., Boussaha, Mekki, Quillet, Edwige, Guyomard, René, Galiana, Delphine, Bobe, Julien, Volff, Jean-Nicolas, Genêt, Carine, Wincker, Patrick, Jaillon, Olivier, Crollius, Hugues Roest, Guiguen, Yann·2014·Nature Communications

Abstract

Vertebrate evolution has been shaped by several rounds of whole-genome duplications (WGDs) that are often suggested to be associated with adaptive radiations and evolutionary innovations. Due to an additional round of WGD, the rainbow trout genome offers a unique opportunity to investigate the early evolutionary fate of a duplicated vertebrate genome. Here we show that after 100 million years of evolution the two ancestral subgenomes have remained extremely collinear, despite the loss of half of the duplicated protein-coding genes, mostly through pseudogenization. In striking contrast is the fate of miRNA genes that have almost all been retained as duplicated copies. The slow and stepwise rediploidization process characterized here challenges the current hypothesis that WGD is followed by massive and rapid genomic reorganizations and gene deletions. Although whole-genome duplications (WGDs) are rare events, they have an important role in shaping vertebrate evolution. Here, the authors sequence the rainbow trout genome and show that rediploidization after WGD occurs in a slow and stepwise manner.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ncomms4657

Cites

10 of 10 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 10 references

Cited by

See all 959

Metadata

Authors
Berthelot, C., Brunet, F., Chalopin, D., Juanchich, A., Bernard, M., Noël, B., Bento, P., Da Silva, C., Labadie, K., Alberti, A., Aury, J.-M., Louis, A., Dehais, P., Bardou, P., Montfort, J., Klopp, C., Cabau, C., Gaspin, C., Thorgaard, G. H., Boussaha, M., Quillet, E., Guyomard, R., Galiana, D., Bobe, J., Volff, J.-N., Genêt, C., Wincker, P., Jaillon, O., Crollius, H. R., & Guiguen, Y.
Venue
Nature Communications
Published
2014-04-22
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
3657-3657
ISSN
2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2034499270
Cited by
959
References
10
FWCI
109.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The rainbow trout genome provides novel insights into evolution after whole-genome duplication in vertebrates. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/ncomms4657
The paper
Berthelot, C., Brunet, F., Chalopin, D., Juanchich, A., Bernard, M., Noël, B., Bento, P., Da Silva, C., Labadie, K., Alberti, A., Aury, J.-M., Louis, A., Dehais, P., Bardou, P., Montfort, J., Klopp, C., Cabau, C., Gaspin, C., Thorgaard, G. H., . . . Guiguen, Y. (2014). The rainbow trout genome provides novel insights into evolution after whole-genome duplication in vertebrates. Nature Communications. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms4657

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.