The DOI matches its Crossref record; 138 of the 138 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Economy, Speed and Size Matter: Evolutionary Forces Driving Nuclear Genome Miniaturization and Expansion
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Nuclear genome size varies 300 000-fold, whereas transcriptome size varies merely 17-fold. In the largest genomes nearly all DNA is non-genic secondary DNA, mostly intergenic but also within introns. There is now compelling evidence that secondary DNA is functional, i.e. positively selected by organismal selection, not the purely neutral or 'selfish' outcome of mutation pressure. The skeletal DNA theory argued that nuclear volumes are genetically determined primarily by nuclear DNA amounts, modulated somewhat by genes affecting the degree of DNA packing or unfolding; the huge spread of nuclear genome sizes is the necessary consequence of the origin of the nuclear envelope and the nucleation of its assembly by DNA, plus the adaptively significant 300 000-fold range of cell volumes and selection for balanced growth by optimizing karyoplasmic volume ratios (essentially invariant with cell volume in growing/multiplying cells). This simple explanation of the C-value paradox is refined here in the light of new insights into the nature of heterochromatin and the nuclear lamina, the genetic control of cell volume, and large-scale eukaryote phylogeny, placing special emphasis on protist test cases of the basic principles of nuclear genome size evolution. GENOME MINIATURIZATION: and Expansion Intracellular parasites (e.g. Plasmodium, microsporidia) dwarfed their genomes by gene loss and eliminating virtually all secondary DNA. The primary driving forces for genome reduction are metabolic and spatial economy and cell multiplication speed. Most extreme nuclear shrinkage yielded genomes as tiny as 0.38 Mb (making the nuclear genome size range effectively 1.8 million-fold!) in some minute enslaved nuclei (nucleomorphs) of cryptomonads and chlorarachneans, chimaeric cells that also retain a separate normal large nucleus. The latter shows typical correlation between genome size and cell volume, but nucleomorphs do not despite co-existing in the same cell for >500 My. Thus mutation pressure does not inexorably increase genome size; selection can eliminate essentially all non-coding DNA if need be. Nucleomorphs and microsporidia even reduced gene size. Expansion of secondary DNA in the main nucleus, and in large-celled eukaryotes generally, must be positively selected for function. Ciliate nuclear dimorphism provides a key test that refutes the selfish DNA and strongly supports the skeletal DNA/karyoplasmic ratio interpretation of genome size evolution. GENETIC CONTROL OF CELL VOLUME IS MULTIGENIC: The quantitatively proportional correlation between genome size and cell size cannot be explained by purely mutational theories, as eukaryote cell volumes are causally determined by cell cycle control genes, not by DNA amounts.
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 General Model for the Origin of Allometric Scaling Laws in Biology
West, G. B., Brown, J. H., & Enquist, B. J. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.276.5309.122 · Cited by 5,016
The comparative method in evolutionary biology
(1992) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.29-5104 · Cited by 4,931
Genome sequence of the human malaria parasite Plasmodium falciparum
Gardner, M. J., Hall, N., Fung, E., White, O., Berriman, M., Hyman, R. W., Carlton, J. M., Pain, A., Nelson, K. E., Bowman, S., et al. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01097 · Cited by 4,407
The Comparative Method in Evolutionary Biology
Harvey, P. H., & Pagel, M. D. (1991) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198546412.001.0001 · Cited by 4,337
Selfish DNA: the ultimate parasite
Orgel, L. E., & Crick, F. H. C. (1980) · Nature · doi:10.1038/284604a0 · Cited by 2,156
Selfish genes, the phenotype paradigm and genome evolution
Doolittle, W. F., & Sapienza, C. (1980) · Nature · doi:10.1038/284601a0 · Cited by 1,829
The Fourth Dimension of Life: Fractal Geometry and Allometric Scaling of Organisms
West, G. B., Brown, J. H., & Enquist, B. J. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.284.5420.1677 · Cited by 1,718 · cited 1×
“…but decline more gently with size; some studies (Shuter et al., 1983) suggest a quarter power law as predicted by some physical considerations (West et al., 1997, 1999, 2002; Brown et al., 2002), whereas others indicate a still shallower decline that varies in magnitude among taxonomic groups…”
BackgroundThe Cell in Development and Heredity
Cleave, H. J. V., & Wilson, E. B. (1925) · Transactions of the American Microscopical Society · doi:10.2307/3221988 · Cited by 1,680
The genome sequence of the filamentous fungus Neurospora crassa
Galagan, J. E., Calvo, S. E., Borkovich, K. A., Selker, E. U., Read, N. D., Jaffe, D., FitzHugh, W., Ma, L.-J., Smirnov, S., Purcell, S., et al. (2003) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01554 · Cited by 1,670
Lehnertz, B., Ueda, Y., Derijck, A. A. H. A., Braunschweig, U., Perez-Burgos, L., Kubicek, S., Chen, T., Li, E., Jenuwein, T., & Peters, A. H. F. M. (2003) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/s0960-9822(03)00432-9 · Cited by 1,245
Cited by
The Black Queen Hypothesis: Evolution of Dependencies through Adaptive Gene Loss
Morris, J. J., Lenski, R. E., & Zinser, E. R. (2012) · mBio · doi:10.1128/mbio.00036-12 · Cited by 1,208
Albalat, R., & Cañestro, C. (2016) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg.2016.39 · Cited by 775
The role of ciliate protozoa in the rumen
Newbold, C. J., de la Fuente, G., Belanche, A., Ramos-Morales, E., & McEwan, N. R. (2015) · Frontiers in Microbiology · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2015.01313 · Cited by 637
The Large Genome Constraint Hypothesis: Evolution, Ecology and Phenotype
KNIGHT, C. A. (2005) · Annals of Botany · doi:10.1093/aob/mci011 · Cited by 538
Is junk DNA bunk? A critique of ENCODE
Doolittle, W. F. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1221376110 · Cited by 429
Metadata
- Authors
- CAVALIER-SMITH, T.
- Venue
- Annals of Botany
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2005-01-01
- Volume
- 95
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 147-175
- ISSN
- 0305-7364 (ISSN-L)
- 1095-8290
- OpenAlex
- W2151777559
- Cited by
- 396
- References
- 138
- FWCI
- 18.74
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Economy, Speed and Size Matter: Evolutionary Forces Driving Nuclear Genome Miniaturization and Expansion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/aob/mci010
- The paper
- CAVALIER-SMITH, T. (2005). Economy, Speed and Size Matter: Evolutionary Forces Driving Nuclear Genome Miniaturization and Expansion. Annals of Botany. https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci010
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.