The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
NOTUNG: A Program for Dating Gene Duplications and Optimizing Gene Family Trees
Open accessAbstract
Large scale gene duplication is a major force driving the evolution of genetic functional innovation. Whole genome duplications are widely believed to have played an important role in the evolution of the maize, yeast, and vertebrate genomes. The use of evolutionary trees to analyze the history of gene duplication and estimate duplication times provides a powerful tool for studying this process. Many studies in the molecular evolution literature have used this approach on small data sets, using analyses performed by hand. The rapid growth of genetic sequence data will soon allow similar studies on a genomic scale, but such studies will be limited unless the analysis can be automated. Even existing data sets admit alternative hypotheses that would be too tedious to consider without automation. In this paper, we describe a program called NOTUNG that facilitates large scale analysis, using both rooted and unrooted trees. When tested on trees analyzed in the literature, NOTUNG consistently yielded results that agree with the assessments in the original publications. Thus, NOTUNG provides a basic building block for inferring duplication dates from gene trees automatically and can also be used as an exploratory analysis tool for evaluating alternative hypotheses.
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 leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation
Efron, B., & Gong, G. (1983) · The American Statistician · doi:10.1080/00031305.1983.10483087 · Cited by 3,229
Cited by
OrthoFinder: phylogenetic orthology inference for comparative genomics
Emms, D. M., & Kelly, S. (2019) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-019-1832-y · Cited by 7,676
Natural history and evolutionary principles of gene duplication in fungi
Wapinski, I., Pfeffer, A., Friedman, N., & Regev, A. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature06107 · Cited by 614
STRIDE: Species Tree Root Inference from Gene Duplication Events
Emms, D. M., & Kelly, S. (2017) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msx259 · Cited by 311
Inoue, J., Sato, Y., Sinclair, R., Tsukamoto, K., & Nishida, M. (2015) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1507669112 · Cited by 210
Sterol and genomic analyses validate the sponge biomarker hypothesis
Gold, D. A., Grabenstatter, J., de Mendoza, A., Riesgo, A., Ruiz-Trillo, I., & Summons, R. E. (2016) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1512614113 · Cited by 145
Metadata
- Authors
- Chen, K., Durand, D., & Farach-Colton, M.
- Venue
- Journal of Computational Biology
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2000-08
- Volume
- 7
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 429-447
- ISSN
- 1066-5277 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-8666
- OpenAlex
- W2061646232
- Cited by
- 566
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 0.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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: NOTUNG: A Program for Dating Gene Duplications and Optimizing Gene Family Trees. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1089/106652700750050871
- The paper
- Chen, K., Durand, D., & Farach-Colton, M. (2000). NOTUNG: A Program for Dating Gene Duplications and Optimizing Gene Family Trees. Journal of Computational Biology. https://doi.org/10.1089/106652700750050871
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.