Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34849767›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2021

Widespread retention of ohnologs in key developmental gene families following whole-genome duplication in arachnopulmonates.

Amber Harper, Luis Baudouin Gonzalez, Anna Schönauer, Ralf Janssen, Michael Seiter, Michaela Holzem, Saad Arif, Alistair P McGregor, Lauren Sumner-Rooney

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Gene and Genome Duplication in Spiders.Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. A homology guide for Pacific salmon genusEcology and evolution · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Amber HarperDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Luis Baudouin GonzalezDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Anna SchönauerDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Ralf JanssenDepartment of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Geocentrum, 752 36 Uppsala, Sweden.
Michael SeiterDepartment of Evolutionary Biology, Unit Integrative Zoology, University of Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Michaela HolzemDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Saad ArifDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0811-8604
Alistair P McGregorDepartment of Biological and Medical Sciences, Faculty of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford OX3 0BP, UK.
Lauren Sumner-RooneyOxford University Museum of Natural History, University of Oxford, Oxford OX1 3PW, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0196-5069
Oxford Brookes University · GBUniversity of Oxford · GBUniversity of Vienna · ATUppsala University · SE

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/M011224/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole-genome duplications (WGDs) have occurred multiple times during animal evolution, including in lineages leading to vertebrates, teleosts, horseshoe crabs, and arachnopulmonates. These dramatic events initially produce a wealth of new genetic material, generally followed by extensive gene loss. It appears, however, that developmental genes such as homeobox genes, signaling pathway components and microRNAs are frequently retained as duplicates (so-called ohnologs) following WGD. These not only provide the best evidence for WGD, but an opportunity to study its evolutionary consequences. Although these genes are well studied in the context of vertebrate WGD, similar comparisons across the extant arachnopulmonate orders are patchy. We sequenced embryonic transcriptomes from two spider species and two amblypygid species and surveyed three important gene families, Hox, Wnt, and frizzled, across these and 12 existing transcriptomic and genomic resources for chelicerates. We report extensive retention of putative ohnologs, further supporting the ancestral arachnopulmonate WGD. We also found evidence of consistent evolutionary trajectories in Hox and Wnt gene repertoires across three of the six arachnopulmonate orders, with interorder variation in the retention of specific paralogs. We identified variation between major clades in spiders and are better able to reconstruct the chronology of gene duplications and losses in spiders, amblypygids, and scorpions. These insights shed light on the evolution of the developmental toolkit in arachnopulmonates, highlight the importance of the comparative approach within lineages, and provide substantial new transcriptomic data for future study.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene DuplicationAnimalsGenes, DevelopmentalGenomeHumansPhylogenyVertebratesarachnidsdevelopmental toolkitgene duplicationtranscriptomeswhole-genome duplication

Identifiers

PMID34849767
PMCPMC8664421
OpenAlexW3196594044

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.