From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Genetics  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Genetics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Genetics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

I am going to extend this topic to cover more about paleopolyploidy including known paleopolyploidy, method of detection and its importance. Please do not remove the thread. Thank you.

Feb21,2007: I will put up the ref list later 5dPZ 00:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Page mostly done, welcome to refine it. Thanks 5dPZ 17:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Needs Reference[edit]

"Genes lost during diploidization is not completely random, but heavily selected." 00:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Error in Figure[edit]

In the big tree depicting when the whole-genome duplication events occured (which is very nice by the way), there are errors. For example the amphioxus is more basal than the ciona branch (see the amphioxus genome paper). Also, the 2R events at the basis of vertebrates probably occured before the divergence with lamprey (see the lamprey genome paper) — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:50, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

gene ratio[edit]

Some researchers have questioned the 2R hypothesis because it predicts that vertebrate genomes should have a 4:1 gene ratio compared with invertebrate genomes

This is a bit of a garden-path sentence: I expect it to continue invertebrate genomes, which have [some other] gene ratio. Would any accuracy be lost if it were rephrased "predicts that vertebrates should have four times as many genes as invertebrates"? —Tamfang (talk) 05:02, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Part about vertebrates needs work[edit]

The 2R hypothesis does not predict a 4:1 gene ratio. That would only be true if no genes were ever lost. This issue is a paper tiger. The two rounds of whole genome duplication in stem vertebrates are now called 2R-WGD and spoken of as an event, not a hypothesis. Belaboring the former controversy violates WP:NOTABLE and WP:FRINGE. There was a third event (known as 3R) in early (but not the earliest) teleosts. However, only 90% of living teleosts inherited this gene duplication. Garfish belong to the 10% that didn't. Meanwhile, the frog Xenopus represents a separate 3R (third round), only this one was allotetraploid. Zyxwv99 (talk) 18:49, 26 December 2015 (UTC)