Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39101615›Full record

ReviewThe Biochemical journal2024

Evolution and maintenance of mtDNA gene content across eukaryotes.

Shibani Veeraragavan, Maria Johansen, Iain G Johnston

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Biochemical journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
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

3 authors.

Shibani VeeraragavanDepartment of Mathematics, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Maria JohansenDepartment of Mathematics, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Iain G JohnstonDepartment of Mathematics, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.ORCID 0000-0001-8559-3519

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Across eukaryotes, most genes required for mitochondrial function have been transferred to, or otherwise acquired by, the nucleus. Encoding genes in the nucleus has many advantages. So why do mitochondria retain any genes at all? Why does the set of mtDNA genes vary so much across different species? And how do species maintain functionality in the mtDNA genes they do retain? In this review, we will discuss some possible answers to these questions, attempting a broad perspective across eukaryotes. We hope to cover some interesting features which may be less familiar from the perspective of particular species, including the ubiquity of recombination outside bilaterian animals, encrypted chainmail-like mtDNA, single genes split over multiple mtDNA chromosomes, triparental inheritance, gene transfer by grafting, gain of mtDNA recombination factors, social networks of mitochondria, and the role of mtDNA dysfunction in feeding the world. We will discuss a unifying picture where organismal ecology and gene-specific features together influence whether organism X retains mtDNA gene Y, and where ecology and development together determine which strategies, importantly including recombination, are used to maintain the mtDNA genes that are retained.

Indexed as

DNA, MitochondrialEvolution, MolecularAnimalsEukaryotaGenes, MitochondrialHumansMitochondriaRecombination, GeneticDNA, Mitochondrialgenome evolutionmitochondrial evolutionmtDNA

Identifiers

PMID39101615
PMCPMC11346449

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.