2020-holocentric
Summary
Ingested 2026-04-21. 1 findings extracted and verified.
Findings worth citing
Finding 1 — In a simplified model excluding polyploidy, 83% of the posterior distribution of the holocentric–monocentric fission rate difference lies above zero, hinting at a weak elevation of fission rates in holocentric clades.
We note that though the credible interval of all ΔR x statistics overlapped zero in this simplified model 83% of the posterior distribution of ΔR γ (difference in fission rates) is above zero. We suggest that this may be a signal for a weak impact of holocentricity on rates of fission. — p. 7
Why this is citable: This nuanced quantitative statement is citable by papers arguing for a subtle holocentric effect on fission-driven karyotype change, and provides the specific posterior proportion other authors can reference.
Counter / limitation: The 95% credible interval still overlaps zero, so this is a suggestive trend rather than a statistically supported result, and it depends on excluding polyploidy from the model.
Topics: chromosome_number_evolution, karyotype_evolution_overview
Related papers on this site
- Drift drives the evolution of chromosome number I: The impac… — 2 shared topics (chromosome_number_evolution, karyotype_evolution_overview)
- Drift drives the evolution of chromosome number II: The impa… — 2 shared topics (chromosome_number_evolution, karyotype_evolution_overview)
- Blackmon et al. 2015 — 2 shared topics (chromosome_number_evolution, karyotype_evolution_overview)
- Sylvester et al. 2020 — 2 shared topics (chromosome_number_evolution, karyotype_evolution_overview)