The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Plant genome size variation: bloating and purging DNA
Open accessAbstract
Plant genome size variation is a dynamic process of bloating and purging DNA. While it was thought plants were on a path to obesity through continual DNA bloating, recent research supports that most plants activity purge DNA. Plant genome size research has greatly benefited from the cataloguing of genome size estimates at the Kew Plant DNA C-values Database, and the recent availability of over 50 fully sequenced and published plant genomes. The emerging trend is that plant genomes bloat due to the copy-and-paste proliferation of a few long terminal repeat retrotransposons (LTRs) and aggressively purge these proliferating LTRs through several mechanisms including illegitimate and incomplete recombination, and double-strand break repair through non-homologous end joining. However, ultra-small genomes such as Utricularia gibba (Bladderwort), which is 82 megabases (Mb), purge excess DNA through genome fractionation and neofunctionalization during multiple rounds of whole genome duplication (WGD). In contrast, the largest published genome, Picea abies (Norway Spruce) at 19 800 Mb, has no detectable WGD but has bloated with diverse and diverged LTRs that either have evaded purging mechanisms or these purging mechanism are absent in gymnosperms. Finally, advances in DNA methylation studies suggest that smaller genomes have a more aggressive epigenomic surveillance system to purge young LTR retrotransposons, which is less active or missing in larger genomes like the bloated gymnosperms. While genome size may not reflect genome complexity, evidence is mounting that genome size may reflect evolutionary status.
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 physical, genetic and functional sequence assembly of the barley genome
The International Barley Genome Sequencing Consortium (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11543 · Cited by 1,456
Conservation and divergence of methylation patterning in plants and animals
Feng, S., Cokus, S. J., Zhang, X., Chen, P.-Y., Bostick, M., Goll, M. G., Hetzel, J., Jain, J., Strauss, S. H., Halpern, M. E., et al. (2010) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1002720107 · Cited by 1,285
Transposable Elements, Epigenetics, and Genome Evolution
Fedoroff, N. V. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.338.6108.758 · Cited by 634
Cited by
What's in a genome? The C-value enigma and the evolution of eukaryotic genome content
Elliott, T. A., & Gregory, T. R. (2015) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2014.0331 · Cited by 323
Metadata
- Authors
- Michael, T. P.
- Venue
- Briefings in Functional Genomics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-03-20
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 308-317
- ISSN
- 2041-2647 (ISSN-L)
- 2041-2649
- 2041-2657
- OpenAlex
- W2113636307
- Cited by
- 172
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 14.06
- 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: Plant genome size variation: bloating and purging DNA. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/bfgp/elu005
- The paper
- Michael, T. P. (2014). Plant genome size variation: bloating and purging DNA. Briefings in Functional Genomics. https://doi.org/10.1093/bfgp/elu005
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.