The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Were vertebrates octoploid?
Open accessAbstract
It has long been suggested that gene and genome duplication play important roles in the evolution of organismal complexity. For example, work by Ohno proposed that two rounds of whole genome doubling (tetraploidy) occurred during the evolution of vertebrates: the extra genes permitting an increase in physiological and anatomical complexity. Several modifications of this ‘two tetraploidies’ hypothesis have been proposed, taking into account accumulating data, and there is wide acceptance of the basic scheme. In the past few years, however, several authors have raised doubts, citing lack of direct support or even evidence to the contrary. Here, we review the evidence for and against the occurrence of tetraploidies in early vertebrate evolution, and present a new compilation of molecular phylogenetic data for amphioxus. We argue that evidence in favour of tetraploidy, based primarily on genome and gene family analyses, is strong. Furthermore, we show that two observations used as evidence against genome duplication are in fact compatible with the hypothesis: but only if the genome doubling occurred by two closely spaced sequential rounds of autotetraploidy. We propose that early vertebrates passed through an autoautooctoploid phase in the evolution of their genomes.
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
Quartet Puzzling: A Quartet Maximum-Likelihood Method for Reconstructing Tree Topologies
Strimmer, K., & von Haeseler, A. (1996) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a025664 · Cited by 2,531
Wada, H., Saiga, H., Satoh, N., & Holland, P. W. H. (1998) · Development · doi:10.1242/dev.125.6.1113 · Cited by 312
Self-citationNikoh, N., Iwabe, N., Kuma, K.-I., Ohno, M., Sugiyama, T., Watanabe, Y., Yasui, K., Shi-cui, Z., Hori, K., Shimura, Y., et al. (1997) · Journal of Molecular Evolution · doi:10.1007/pl00006208 · Cited by 79
Cited by
Two Rounds of Whole Genome Duplication in the Ancestral Vertebrate
Dehal, P., & Boore, J. L. (2005) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030314 · Cited by 1,526
From 2R to 3R: evidence for a fish-specific genome duplication (FSGD)
Meyer, A., & Van de Peer, Y. (2005) · BioEssays · doi:10.1002/bies.20293 · Cited by 945
Evolution of the vertebrate eye: Opsins, photoreceptors, retina and eye cup
Lamb, T. D., Collin, S. P., & Pugh, E. N. (2007) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2283 · Cited by 454
Deeply conserved synteny resolves early events in vertebrate evolution
Simakov, O., Marlétaz, F., Yue, J.-X., O’Connell, B., Jenkins, J., Brandt, A., Calef, R., Tung, C.-H., Huang, T.-K., Schmutz, J., et al. (2020) · Nature Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1038/s41559-020-1156-z · Cited by 363
Robertson, F. M., Gundappa, M. K., Grammes, F., Hvidsten, T. R., Redmond, A. K., Lien, S., Martin, S. A. M., Holland, P. W. H., Sandve, S. R., & Macqueen, D. J. (2017) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-017-1241-z · Cited by 212
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Furlong, R. F., & Holland, P. W. H.
- Venue
- Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences
- Publisher
- The Royal Society
- Published
- 2002-04-29
- Volume
- 357
- Issue
- 1420
- Pages
- 531-544
- ISSN
- 0962-8436 (ISSN-L)
- 1471-2970
- OpenAlex
- W2134692197
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 24.94
- 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: Were vertebrates octoploid? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2001.1035
- The paper
- Furlong, R. F., & Holland, P. W. H. (2002). Were vertebrates octoploid? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2001.1035
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.