Cited by 2,363Chromosomal and Genetic VariationsPlant Taxonomy and PhylogeneticsPlant Diversity and Evolution

Polyploid incidence and evolution

Otto, Sarah P, Whitton, Jeannette·2000·Annual Review of Genetics

Abstract

▪ Abstract Changes in ploidy occurred early in the diversification of some animal and plant lineages and represent an ongoing phenomenon in others. While the prevalence of polyploid lineages indicates that this phenomenon is a common and successful evolutionary transition, whether polyploidization itself has a significant effect on patterns and rates of diversification remains an open question. Here we review evidence for the creative role of polyploidy in evolution. We present new estimates for the incidence of polyploidy in ferns and flowering plants based on a simple model describing transitions between odd and even base chromosome numbers. These new estimates indicate that ploidy changes may represent from 2 to 4% of speciation events in flowering plants and 7% in ferns. Speciation via polyploidy is likely to be one of the more predominant modes of sympatric speciation in plants, owing to its potentially broad-scale effects on gene regulation and developmental processes, effects that can produce immediate shifts in morphology, breeding system, and ecological tolerances. Theoretical models support the potential for increased adaptability in polyploid lineages. The evidence suggests that polyploidization can produce shifts in genetic systems and phenotypes that have the potential to result in increased evolutionary diversification, yet conclusive evidence that polyploidy has changed rates and patterns of diversification remains elusive.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.genet.34.1.401

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Whole-genome duplication is far more common in plants than in animals.

    “given that whole-genome duplication (WGD) is far more common in plants than it is in animals (Otto and Whitton, 2000)”

    From Genomics of plant speciation (2023) · cites this paper as Otto and Whitton, 2000

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Otto, S. P., & Whitton, J.
Affiliations
University of British Columbia (CA)
Venue
Annual Review of Genetics
Published
2000-12
Volume
34
Issue
1
Pages
401-437
ISSN
  • 0066-4197 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-2948
OpenAlex
W2168557059
Cited by
2,363
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 65 · 2025: 103 · 2024: 91 · 2023: 93 · 2022: 144 · 2021: 142 · 2020: 111 · 2019: 116 · 2018: 114 · 2017: 128 · 2016: 101 · 2015: 97 · 2014: 129 · 2013: 112 · 2012: 115
FWCI
2.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annual Review of Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Plant Diversity and Evolution
Keywords
polyploidy, polyploidization, speciation, sympatric speciation, diversification rates, ferns, flowering plants, chromosome number evolution, plant evolution
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Evolution, Plants, Polyploidy, Gene Duplication

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