The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rapid Evolution of Enormous, Multichromosomal Genomes in Flowering Plant Mitochondria with Exceptionally High Mutation Rates
Open accessAbstract
Genome size and complexity vary tremendously among eukaryotic species and their organelles. Comparisons across deeply divergent eukaryotic lineages have suggested that variation in mutation rates may explain this diversity, with increased mutational burdens favoring reduced genome size and complexity. The discovery that mitochondrial mutation rates can differ by orders of magnitude among closely related angiosperm species presents a unique opportunity to test this hypothesis. We sequenced the mitochondrial genomes from two species in the angiosperm genus Silene with recent and dramatic accelerations in their mitochondrial mutation rates. Contrary to theoretical predictions, these genomes have experienced a massive proliferation of noncoding content. At 6.7 and 11.3 Mb, they are by far the largest known mitochondrial genomes, larger than most bacterial genomes and even some nuclear genomes. In contrast, two slowly evolving Silene mitochondrial genomes are smaller than average for angiosperms. Consequently, this genus captures approximately 98% of known variation in organelle genome size. The expanded genomes reveal several architectural changes, including the evolution of complex multichromosomal structures (with 59 and 128 circular-mapping chromosomes, ranging in size from 44 to 192 kb). They also exhibit a substantial reduction in recombination and gene conversion activity as measured by the relative frequency of alternative genome conformations and the level of sequence divergence between repeat copies. The evolution of mutation rate, genome size, and chromosome structure can therefore be extremely rapid and interrelated in ways not predicted by current evolutionary theories. Our results raise the hypothesis that changes in recombinational processes, including gene conversion, may be a central force driving the evolution of both mutation rate and genome structure.
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
BLAST+: architecture and applications
Camacho, C., Coulouris, G., Avagyan, V., Ma, N., Papadopoulos, J., Bealer, K., & Madden, T. L. (2009) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-421 · Cited by 22,074
Tandem repeats finder: a program to analyze DNA sequences
Benson, G. (1999) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/27.2.573 · Cited by 9,374
Did Genetic Drift Drive Increases in Genome Complexity?
Whitney, K. D., & Garland, T. (2010) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001080 · Cited by 142
Cited by
Gray, M. W. (2012) · Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology · doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a011403 · Cited by 639
Cytonuclear Genomic Interactions and Hybrid Breakdown
Burton, R. S., Pereira, R. J., & Barreto, F. S. (2013) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110512-135758 · Cited by 334
Plant organellar genomes: much done, much more to do
Wang, J., Kan, S., Liao, X., Zhou, J., Tembrock, L. R., Daniell, H., Jin, S., & Wu, Z. (2024) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2023.12.014 · Cited by 280
When two rights make a wrong: the evolutionary genetics of plant hybrid incompatibilities
Fishman, L., & Sweigart, A. L. (2018) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-042817-040113 · Cited by 117
Metadata
- Authors
- Sloan, D. B., Alverson, A. J., Chuckalovcak, J. P., Wu, M., McCauley, D. E., Palmer, J. D., & Taylor, D. R.
- Venue
- PLoS Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2012-01-17
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- e1001241
- ISSN
- 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-7885
- OpenAlex
- W2063732750
- Cited by
- 753
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 38.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
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.