ArticleGenetics and molecular biology2024
Re-evaluating evidence for giant genomes in amoebae.
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.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.