The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Genomic Duplication, Fractionation and the Origin of Regulatory Novelty
Abstract
Having diverged 50 MYA, rice remained diploid while the maize lineage became tetraploid and then fractionated by losing genes from one or the other duplicate region. We sequenced and annotated 13 maize genes (counting the duplicate gene as one gene) on one or the other of the pair of homeologous maize regions; 12 genes were present in one cluster in rice. Excellent maize-rice synteny was evident, but only after the fractionated maize regions were condensed onto a finished rice map. Excluding the gene we used to define homeologs, we found zero retention. Once retained, fractionation (loss of functioning DNA sequence) could occur within cis-acting gene space. We chose a retained duplicate basic leucine zipper transcription factor gene because it was well marked with big, exact phylogenetic footprints (CNSs). Detailed alignments of lg2 and retained duplicate lrs1 to their rice ortholog found that fractionation of conserved noncoding sequences (CNSs) was rare, as expected. Of 30 CNSs, 27 were conserved. The 3 unexpected, missing CNSs and a large insertion support subfunctionalization as a reflection of fractionation of cis-acting gene space and the recent evolution of lg2’s novel maize leaf and shoot developmental functions. In general, the principles of fractionation and consolidation work well in making sense of maize gene and genomic sequence data.
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
Cited by
The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid
Comai, L. (2005) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1711 · Cited by 2,287
The Atlantic salmon genome provides insights into rediploidization
Lien, S., Koop, B. F., Sandve, S. R., Miller, J. R., Kent, M. P., Nome, T., Hvidsten, T. R., Leong, J. S., Minkley, D. R., Zimin, A., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature17164 · Cited by 1,047
Freeling, M. (2009) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev.arplant.043008.092122 · Cited by 1,015
Self-citationBerthelot, C., Brunet, F., Chalopin, D., Juanchich, A., Bernard, M., Noël, B., Bento, P., Da Silva, C., Labadie, K., Alberti, A., et al. (2014) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms4657 · Cited by 959
Genome evolution in the allotetraploid frog Xenopus laevis
Session, A. M., Uno, Y., Kwon, T., Chapman, J. A., Toyoda, A., Takahashi, S., Fukui, A., Hikosaka, A., Suzuki, A., Kondo, M., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature19840 · Cited by 949
Metadata
- Authors
- Langham, R. J., Walsh, J., Dunn, M., Ko, C., Goff, S. A., & Freeling, M.
- Venue
- Genetics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2004-02-01
- Volume
- 166
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 935-945
- ISSN
- 0016-6731 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-2631
- OpenAlex
- W2145046927
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.25
- 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: Genomic Duplication, Fractionation and the Origin of Regulatory Novelty. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/genetics/166.2.935
- The paper
- Langham, R. J., Walsh, J., Dunn, M., Ko, C., Goff, S. A., & Freeling, M. (2004). Genomic Duplication, Fractionation and the Origin of Regulatory Novelty. Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/166.2.935
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.