The DOI matches its Crossref record; 459 of the 459 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Polyploidy, the Nucleotype, and Novelty: The Impact of Genome Doubling on the Biology of the Cell
Abstract
Polyploidy is a key mechanism of genome evolution and speciation, particularly in plants. Many aspects of polyploidy have been elucidated with the tools that have become available during the molecular genetics and genomics revolution. Nevertheless, significant questions remain about how genome doubling per se, in the absence of hybridization, is capable of generating evolutionary novelty. This is particularly true at the cellular level, where since the discovery of polyploidy it has been assumed that increased cell size plays a key role in physiological and developmental changes associated with genome doubling, usually through changing the surface-to-volume ratio. Cell size, nuclear volume, and cell cycle duration have been hypothesized to be among a suite of “nucleotypic” characters, defined as phenotypic traits influenced by bulk DNA amount, irrespective of genic content. We update this old but still relevant concept, focusing on what current knowledge from cell biology can elucidate about how quantitative differences between diploids and isogenic autopolyploids could lead to phenotypic differences. Much remains to be learned before causality and correlation can be distinguished in the complex network of interactions among the cytoplasm, the nucleus and other organelles, the cell cycle, metabolism, and intra- and intercellular transport. It is clear that many effects of polyploidy are likely to be cell type specific and are conditioned by the different genomic architectures of species in which genome doubling occurs. The rapidly developing ability to study key processes such as transcription and the movement of molecules in single cells will enable experiments capable of addressing fundamental questions about potentially nucleotypic aspects of genome doubling and how these interact with genotypes to produce phenotypic novelty.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
A 3D Map of the Human Genome at Kilobase Resolution Reveals Principles of Chromatin Looping
Rao, S. S. P., Huntley, M. H., Durand, N. C., Stamenova, E. K., Bochkov, I. D., Robinson, J. T., Sanborn, A. L., Machol, I., Omer, A. D., Lander, E. S., et al. (2014) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.021 · Cited by 9,212
Highly parallel genome-wide expression profiling of individual cells using nanoliter droplets.
Macosko, E. Z., Basu, A., Satija, R., Nemesh, J., Shekhar, K., Goldman, M., Tirosh, I., Bialas, A. R., Kamitaki, N., Martersteck, E. M., et al. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.002 · Cited by 7,110
Global quantification of mammalian gene expression control
Schwanhäusser, B., Busse, D., Li, N., Dittmar, G., Schuchhardt, J., Wolf, J., Chen, W., & Selbach, M. (2011) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature10098 · Cited by 6,566 · cited 1×
“Due to multiple levels of posttranscriptional regulation, the correlation between transcriptome and proteome is often quite weak (e.g., Schwanhausser et al. 2011; Marguerat et al. 2012; Bauernfeind and Babbitt 2017).”
BackgroundInsights into the regulation of protein abundance from proteomic and transcriptomic analyses
Vogel, C., & Marcotte, E. M. (2012) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3185 · Cited by 4,195
Genetic effects on gene expression across human tissues
GTEx Consortium (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature24277 · Cited by 4,036
Droplet barcoding for single-cell transcriptomics applied to embryonic stem cells
Klein, A. M., Mazutis, L., Akartuna, I., Tallapragada, N., Veres, A., Li, V., Peshkin, L., Weitz, D. A., & Kirschner, M. W. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.044 · Cited by 3,356
The Significance of Responses of the Genome to Challenge
McClintock, B. (1984) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.15739260 · Cited by 2,617
Nature, Nurture, or Chance: Stochastic Gene Expression and Its Consequences
Raj, A., & van Oudenaarden, A. (2008) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2008.09.050 · Cited by 2,593
Macromolecular crowding: obvious but underappreciated
Ellis, R. J. (2001) · Trends in Biochemical Sciences · doi:10.1016/s0968-0004(01)01938-7 · Cited by 2,309
The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid
Comai, L. (2005) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1711 · Cited by 2,287
Cited by
Bock, D. G., Cai, Z., Elphinstone, C., González-Segovia, E., Hirabayashi, K., Huang, K., Keais, G. L., Kim, A., Owens, G. L., & Rieseberg, L. H. (2023) · Plant Communications · doi:10.1016/j.xplc.2023.100599 · Cited by 84
“These findings have shaped new questions on the study of polyploidy (Soltis et al., 2010), which increasingly focus on the role of ancient WGDs as catalysts of ecological innovation and evolutionary diversification (Wood et al., 2009; Doyle and Coate, 2019; Baniaga et al., 2020).”
Metadata
- Authors
- Doyle, J. J., & Coate, J. E.
- Venue
- International Journal of Plant Sciences
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 2019-01
- Volume
- 180
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-52
- ISSN
- 1058-5893 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5315
- OpenAlex
- W2904024885
- Cited by
- 365
- References
- 459
- FWCI
- 24.88
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Polyploidy, the Nucleotype, and Novelty: The Impact of Genome Doubling on the Biology of the Cell. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/700636
- The paper
- Doyle, J. J., & Coate, J. E. (2019). Polyploidy, the Nucleotype, and Novelty: The Impact of Genome Doubling on the Biology of the Cell. International Journal of Plant Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1086/700636
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.