Synergy between sequence and size in Large-scale genomics

By T. Ryan Gregory. Nature reviews genetics, 2005

323 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

DNA transposons and the evolution of eukaryotic genomes. (2007, background): “It is now well established that these variations largely account for the wide differences in genome size observed among eukaryotes, and even between closely related species (64, 100).”
The choice of model organisms in evo–devo (2007, background): “The C-value paradox becomes apparent only when genome-size data from non-sequenced genomes is include”
Annotating non-coding regions of the genome (2010, background): “Smaller organisms with fewer cell types have comparatively less non-coding DNA ( Table 2 ), although some deviate substantially from this tren”
The largest eukaryotic genome of them all (2010, background): “…with available data for over 10 000 species showing that they currently vary c. 57 000-fold (this is less than often quoted because the commonly cited extreme values for amoebae, e.g. 700 000 Mbp for Amoeba dubia, are excluded due to considerable uncertainty about their accuracy; Gregory, 2005b).”
Eukaryotic genome size databases (2006, unknown): “Jawless fishes 26 17 (16) 1.3‐4.6 2.3 Cartilaginous fishes 183 130 (13) 2.5‐17.1 5.7 Lungfishes 14 4 (66) 50‐133 90.4 Chondrostean fishes 38 22 (42) 1.2‐7.3 3.5 Teleost fishes 1761 1354 (5) 0.4‐4.4 1.2 Amphibians 870 463 (9) 0.95‐120.1 16.7 Reptiles 406 309 (4) 1.1‐5.4 2.3 Birds 274 205 ( 2 ) 1.0‐2.”