Genome size and extinction risk in vertebrates

The hypothesis of ‘selfish DNA’ is tested for the case of animals using the relation between genome size and conservation status of a given species. In contrast to plants, where the larger genome was previously shown to increase the likelihood of extinction, the picture is more complicated in animals. At the within–families and within–orders levels, the larger genome increases the risk of extinction only in reptiles and birds (which have the smallest genomes among tetrapods). In fishes and amphibians, the effect is caused by the higher taxonomic levels (above order). In several phylogenetic lineages of anamniotes, there is a correlation between a higher fraction of threatened species and a lower number of extant species in a lineage with the larger genome. In mammals, no effect was observed at any taxonomic level. The obtained data support the concept of hierarchical selection. It is also shown that, in plants and reptiles, the probability of being threatened increases from less than 10% to more than 80% with the increase in genome size, which can help in establishing conservation priorities.

[1]  James P. Collins,et al.  Global amphibian declines: sorting the hypotheses , 2003 .

[2]  A. Vinogradov NUCLEOTYPIC EFFECT IN HOMEOTHERMS: BODY‐MASS INDEPENDENT RESTING METABOLIC RATE OF PASSERINE BIRDS IS RELATED TO GENOME SIZE , 1997, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[3]  A. Vinogradov Genome size and GC-percent in vertebrates as determined by flow cytometry: the triangular relationship. , 1998, Cytometry.

[4]  T. Ryan Gregory,et al.  A BIRD'S-EYE VIEW OF THE C-VALUE ENIGMA: GENOME SIZE, CELL SIZE, AND METABOLIC RATE IN THE CLASS AVES , 2002 .

[5]  D. Madison,et al.  Dryness increases predation risk in efts: support for an amphibian decline hypothesis , 2003, Oecologia.

[6]  J. Kozłowski,et al.  Cell size as a link between noncoding DNA and metabolic rate scaling , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  T. Gregory Variation across amphibian species in the size of the nuclear genome supports a pluralistic, hierarchical approach to the C‐value enigma , 2003 .

[8]  D. Mccormick Sequence the Human Genome , 1986, Bio/Technology.

[9]  T. Ryan Gregory,et al.  Macroevolution, hierarchy theory, and the C-value enigma , 2004, Paleobiology.

[10]  Alexander E Vinogradov,et al.  Selfish DNA is maladaptive: evidence from the plant Red List. , 2003, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[11]  W. Doolittle,et al.  Selfish genes, the phenotype paradigm and genome evolution , 1980, Nature.

[12]  S. Edwards,et al.  Evolutionary Dynamics of Intron Size, Genome Size, and Physiological Correlates in Archosaurs , 2002, The American Naturalist.

[13]  E. Olmo Reptiles: a group of transition in the evolution of genome size and of the nucleotypic effect , 2003, Cytogenetic and Genome Research.

[14]  F. Crick,et al.  Selfish DNA: the ultimate parasite , 1980, Nature.

[15]  M. Bennett,et al.  Plant genome values: how much do we know? , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[16]  A. Vinogradov NUCLEOTYPIC EFFECT IN HOMEOTHERMS: BODY‐MASS‐CORRECTED BASAL METABOLIC RATE OF MAMMALS IS RELATED TO GENOME SIZE , 1995, Evolution; international journal of organic evolution.

[17]  A. Vinogradov,et al.  Phenological resonance and quantum life history. , 2004, Journal of theoretical biology.

[18]  S. Gould,et al.  Individuality and adaptation across levels of selection: how shall we name and generalize the unit of Darwinism? , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[19]  A. Vinogradov Buffering: a possible passive-homeostasis role for redundant DNA. , 1998, Journal of theoretical biology.

[20]  H. Szarski,et al.  Cell size and the concept of wasteful and frugal evolutionary strategies. , 1983, Journal of theoretical biology.