The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Duplication and Divergence: The Evolution of New Genes and Old Ideas
Abstract
▪ Abstract Over 35 years ago, Susumu Ohno stated that gene duplication was the single most important factor in evolution ( 97 ). He reiterated this point a few years later in proposing that without duplicated genes the creation of metazoans, vertebrates, and mammals from unicellular organisms would have been impossible. Such big leaps in evolution, he argued, required the creation of new gene loci with previously nonexistent functions ( 98 ). Bold statements such as these, combined with his proposal that at least one whole-genome duplication event facilitated the evolution of vertebrates, have made Ohno an icon in the literature on genome evolution. However, discussion on the occurrence and consequences of gene and genome duplication events has a much longer, and often neglected, history. Here we review literature dealing with the occurence and consequences of gene duplication, begining in 1911. We document conceptual and technological advances in gene duplication research from this early research in comparative cytology up to recent research on whole genomes, “transcriptomes,” and “interactomes.” We have formerly seen that parts many times repeated are eminently liable to vary in number and structure; consequently it is quite probable that natural selection, during the long-continued course of modification, should have seized on a certain number of the primordially similar elements, many times repeated, and have adapted them to the most diverse purposes. Charles Darwin, 1859 ( 23 )
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
The Evolutionary Fate and Consequences of Duplicate Genes
Lynch, M., & Conery, J. S. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.290.5494.1151 · Cited by 4,988
A Recent Polyploidy Superimposed on Older Large-Scale Duplications in the Arabidopsis Genome
Blanc, G., Hokamp, K., & Wolfe, K. H. (2003) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.751803 · Cited by 724
Extensive genomic duplication during early chordate evolution
McLysaght, A., Hokamp, K., & Wolfe, K. H. (2002) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng884 · Cited by 530
Gu, X., Wang, Y., & Gu, J. (2002) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng902 · Cited by 257
Cited by
The causes and consequences of genetic heterogeneity in cancer evolution
Burrell, R. A., McGranahan, N., Bartek, J., & Swanton, C. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12625 · Cited by 2,262
Turning a hobby into a job: How duplicated genes find new functions
Conant, G. C., & Wolfe, K. H. (2008) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg2482 · Cited by 1,281
Gene duplication and evolutionary novelty in plants
Flagel, L. E., & Wendel, J. F. (2009) · New Phytologist · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.02923.x · Cited by 969
Ever-Changing Landscapes: Transcriptional Enhancers in Development and Evolution
Long, H. K., Prescott, S. L., & Wysocka, J. (2016) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.018 · Cited by 945
Evolution at Two Levels: On Genes and Form
Carroll, S. B. (2005) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0030245 · Cited by 882
Metadata
- Authors
- Taylor, J. S., & Raes, J.
- Venue
- Annual Review of Genetics
- Publisher
- Annual Reviews
- Published
- 2004-12-01
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 615-643
- ISSN
- 0066-4197 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-2948
- OpenAlex
- W2166085889
- Cited by
- 918
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 2.87
- 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: Duplication and Divergence: The Evolution of New Genes and Old Ideas. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.092831
- The paper
- Taylor, J. S., & Raes, J. (2004). Duplication and Divergence: The Evolution of New Genes and Old Ideas. Annual Review of Genetics. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.092831
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.