Free-living human cells reconfigure their chromosomes in the evolution back to uni-cellularity
eLife, ISSN: 2050-084X, Vol: 6
2017
- 30Citations
- 80Captures
- 1Mentions
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations30
- Citation Indexes30
- CrossRef30
- 24
- Captures80
- Readers80
- 60
- 20
- Mentions1
- News Mentions1
- News1
Most Recent News
Free-living human cells reconfigure their chromosomes in the evolution back to uni-cellularity
Essential Revisions: 1) What you refer to as non-cancer cell lines have in fact been immortalized either by telomerase or EBV; they are thus poor
Article Description
Cells of multi-cellular organisms evolve toward uni-cellularity in the form of cancer and, if humans intervene, continue to evolve in cell culture. During this process, gene dosage relationships may evolve in novel ways to cope with the new environment and may regress back to the ancestral uni-cellular state. In this context, the evolution of sex chromosomes vis-a-vis autosomes is of particular interest. Here, we report the chromosomal evolution in ~ 600 cancer cell lines. Many of them jettisoned either Y or the inactive X; thus, free-living male and female cells converge by becoming ‘de-sexualized’. Surprisingly, the active X often doubled, accompanied by the addition of one haploid complement of autosomes, leading to an X:A ratio of 2:3 from the extant ratio of 1:2. Theoretical modeling of the frequency distribution of X:A karyotypes suggests that the 2:3 ratio confers a higher fitness and may reflect aspects of sex chromosome evolution.
Bibliographic Details
10.7554/elife.28070.001; 10.7554/elife.28070; 10.7554/elife.28070.002; 10.7554/elife.28070.026; 10.7554/elife.28070.006; 10.7554/elife.28070.005; 10.7554/elife.28070.027; 10.7554/elife.28070.009; 10.7554/elife.28070.012; 10.7554/elife.28070.003
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85040829450&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.001; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29251591; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#digest; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.002; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#decision-letter; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.026; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#fig3; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.006; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#fig2; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.005; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#author-response; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.027; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#fig4; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.009; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070; https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/28070/elife-28070-v1.pdf; https://cdn.elifesciences.org/articles/28070/elife-28070-v1.xml; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#fig5; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.012; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#abstract; https://elifesciences.org/articles/28070#fig1; http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070.003; https://dx.doi.org/10.7554/elife.28070
eLife Sciences Organisation, Ltd.
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know