Back

The Genomic Legacy of Ancient Polyploidy in Crop Domestication

McKibben, M. T. W.; Barker, M. S.

2026-03-11 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.03.09.710542 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Species that have an ancestry of whole-genome duplications (WGDs) are more likely to be domesticated, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. We tested whether paleologs--genes duplicated during ancient WGDs--are enriched in candidate domestication lists across 22 crop species spanning 17 genera. Paleologs were significantly enriched in 14 species, with single-copy paleologs showing the most consistent overrepresentation. In contrast, genes from small-scale duplications were consistently underrepresented among domestication candidates. This enrichment was independent of WGD age and degree of gene loss, indicating that constraint on copy number does not preclude selection on gene function. Several non-mutually exclusive processes could explain this pattern, including accumulated genetic diversity becoming available upon return to single-copy, selection to maintain essential functions, and greater selection efficiency on unmasked loci. Ancient WGDs thus provide a persistent genomic substrate for crop evolution millions of years later.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
New Phytologist
○ 346 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
18.1%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Horticulture Research
◐ 47 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.1%
Similar papers in this journal
3
Molecular Biology and Evolution
◐ 542 papers in training set
Top 1%
6.1%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 11%
4.7%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 20%
4.7%
Similar papers in this journal
50% of probability mass above
6
Plant Physiology
◐ 238 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.2%
7
BMC Plant Biology
○ 57 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.0%
8
Applications in Plant Sciences
○ 23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.0%
9
Current Biology
○ 665 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.6%
10
The Plant Cell
◐ 161 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.4%
11
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 40%
2.4%
12
GigaScience
◐ 212 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
13
The Plant Journal
○ 215 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
14
Genome Biology
○ 637 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.9%
15
Genome Biology and Evolution
◐ 338 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.7%
16
The Plant Genome
○ 57 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.6%
17
G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics
◐ 252 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
18
Nature Genetics
○ 286 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
19
Frontiers in Plant Science
○ 256 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
20
Communications Biology
○ 993 papers in training set
Top 23%
1.1%
21
BMC Genomics
○ 406 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
22
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 63%
1.0%
23
Plant Biotechnology Journal
○ 64 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
24
GENETICS
◐ 483 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
25
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 60%
0.8%
26
Plant Communications
○ 36 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
27
Nature Plants
○ 94 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
28
Plant Direct
○ 95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
29
PLOS Genetics
● 862 papers in training set
Top 14%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.