Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39873136›Full record

ArticleGenetics and molecular biology2024

Re-evaluating evidence for giant genomes in amoebae.

Daniel Barzilay, João P B Alcino, Giulia M Ribeiro, Alfredo L P Sousa, Daniel J G Lahr

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics and molecular biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

5 authors.

Daniel BarzilayUniversidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Zoologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0005-9475-7411
João P B AlcinoUniversidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Zoologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9630-5946
Giulia M RibeiroUniversidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Zoologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3366-3735
Alfredo L P SousaUniversidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Zoologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7490-158X
Daniel J G LahrUniversidade de São Paulo, Instituto de Biociências, Departamento de Zoologia, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1049-0635

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Here we reassess available evidence for the long-held misconception of amoebae possessing exceptionally large genomes. Traditionally, estimates relied on inaccurate methods like DNA weight measurements, leading to inflated sizes. These methods failed to account for contaminating DNA from prey, endosymbionts, and intrinsic genomic features like ribosomal operon amplification. Modern sequencing techniques unveil a different picture. Fully sequenced amoebozoa genomes range from 14.4 to 52.37 mega basepairs, well within the typical single-celled eukaryote expectation. While the whole genome of the historically relevant Amoeba proteus has not yet been fully sequenced, we provide here a statistical analysis using protein-coding genes from transcriptomic data, suggesting that the genome size is consistent with this range, far smaller than previously claimed. The misconception likely originated in the early 21st century and perpetuated through popular science materials. We conclude that there is no longer reason to reaffirm that amoeba genomes are giant.

Identifiers

PMID39873136
PMCPMC11773323

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.