Cited by 235Chromosomal and Genetic VariationsFungal and yeast genetics researchGenome Rearrangement Algorithms

Independent sorting-out of thousands of duplicated gene pairs in two yeast species descended from a whole-genome duplication.

Open access
Scannell, Devin R., Frank, A. Carolin, Conant, Gavin C., Byrne, Kevin P., Woolfit, Megan, Wolfe, Kenneth H.·2007·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Among yeasts that underwent whole-genome duplication (WGD), Kluyveromyces polysporus represents the lineage most distant from Saccharomyces cerevisiae. By sequencing the K. polysporus genome and comparing it with the S. cerevisiae genome using a likelihood model of gene loss, we show that these species diverged very soon after the WGD, when their common ancestor contained >9,000 genes. The two genomes subsequently converged onto similar current sizes (5,600 protein-coding genes each) and independently retained sets of duplicated genes that are strikingly similar. Almost half of their surviving single-copy genes are not orthologs but paralogs formed by WGD, as would be expected if most gene pairs were resolved independently. In addition, by comparing the pattern of gene loss among K. polysporus, S. cerevisiae, and three other yeasts that diverged after the WGD, we show that the patterns of gene loss changed over time. Initially, both members of a duplicate pair were equally likely to be lost, but loss of the same gene copy in independent lineages was increasingly favored at later time points. This trend parallels an increasing restriction of reciprocal gene loss to more slowly evolving gene pairs over time and suggests that, as duplicate genes diverged, one gene copy became favored over the other. The apparent low initial sequence divergence of the gene pairs leads us to propose that the yeast WGD was probably an autopolyploidization.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.0608218104

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • These Ty-like retrotransposon genes (Tkp5-1 to -9) were most similar to the Tkp5 protein from V. polyspora.

    “These Ty-like retrotransposons genes (named here Tkp5-1 to -9) were most similar to the Tkp5 protein from V. polyspora, a yeast representing the postwhole-genome duplication lineage most divergent from S. cerevisiae (Scannell et al. 2007).”

    From Comparative Genomics of Two Sequential <i>Candida glabrata</i> Clinical Isolates (2017) · cites this paper as Scannell et al. 2007

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [4]Dujon B, Sherman D, Fischer G, Durrens P, Casaregola S, Lafontaine I, De Montigny J, Marck C, Neuveglise C, Talla E, et al. Nature. 2004;430:35–44. [Google Scholar]
  2. [22]Roberts CJ, van der Walt JP. Compt Rend Lab Carlsberg. 1959;31:129–148. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. [26]Werth CR, Windham MD. Am Nat. 1991;137:515–526. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scannell, D. R., Frank, A. C., Conant, G. C., Byrne, K. P., Woolfit, M., & Wolfe, K. H.
Affiliations
Trinity College Dublin (IE)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2007-05-15
Volume
104
Issue
20
Pages
8397-8402
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2064322162
Cited by
235
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 17
FWCI
28.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Fungal and yeast genetics research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genome Rearrangement Algorithms
Keywords
whole-genome duplication, gene loss, paralogs, orthologs, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, yeast evolution, autopolyploidization, gene family evolution, genome size reduction
MeSH terms
Base Sequence, Kluyveromyces, Models, Genetic, Molecular Sequence Data, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid, Time Factors, Likelihood Functions, Genome, Fungal, Conserved Sequence, Evolution, Molecular, Genes, Duplicate, Gene Duplication, Gene Order

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