title: Nutrient reserves may allow for genome size increase: evidence from comparison of geophytes and their sister non-geophytic relatives.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The genome size of an organism is determined by its capacity to tolerate genome expansion, given the species' life strategy and the limits of a particular environment, and the ability for retrotransposon suppression and/or removal. In some giant-genomed bulb geophytes, this tolerance is explained by their ability to pre-divide cells in the dormant stages or by the selective advantage of larger cells in the rapid growth of their fleshy body. In this study, a test shows that the tendency for genome size expansion is a more universal feature of geophytes, and is a subject in need of more general consideration.
  
  
  METHODS
  Differences in monoploid genome sizes were compared using standardized phylogenetically independent contrasts in 47 sister pairs of geophytic and non-geophytic taxa sampled across all the angiosperms. The genome sizes of 96 species were adopted from the literature and 53 species were newly measured using flow cytometry with propidium iodide staining.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The geophytes showed increased genome sizes compared with their non-geophytic relatives, regardless of the storage organ type and regardless of whether or not vernal geophytes, polyploids or annuals were included in the analyses.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The universal tendency of geophytes to possess a higher genome size suggests the presence of a universal mechanism allowing for genome expansion. It is assumed that this is primarily due to the nutrient and energetic independence of geophytes perhaps allowing continuous synthesis of DNA, which is known to proceed in the extreme cases of vernal geophytes even in dormant stages. This independence may also be assumed as a reason for allowing large genomes in some parasitic plants, as well as the nutrient limitation of small genomes of carnivorous plants.
authors: Department of Botany and Zoology, Masaryk University, Kotlářská 2, CZ-61137, Brno, Czech Republic.
authors: Pavel
authors: P
authors: Veselý
authors: Petr
authors: P
authors: Bureš
authors: Petr
authors: P
authors: Šmarda
mesh_terms: D018744:DNA, Plant / Q000235:genetics; D019143:Evolution, Molecular; D005434:Flow Cytometry; D014644:Genetic Variation; D059646:Genome Size / Q000235:genetics*; D018745:Genome, Plant / Q000235:genetics*; D019684:Magnoliopsida / Q000235:genetics*; D018517:Plant Roots / Q000235:genetics; D011123:Polyploidy; D018626:Retroelements; D012621:Seasons
chemical_list: D018744:DNA, Plant; D018626:Retroelements
keywords: Cx-value; Genome size evolution; energy reserves; ephemeroids; flow cytometry; life form; spring geophytes; storage organ
references: J Exp Bot. 2001 Oct;52(363):2043-9
references: 11559740
references: Am J Bot. 2009 Jan;96(1):336-48
references: 21628192
references: Ann Bot. 2005 Jan;95(1):127-32
references: 15596462
references: Cytometry A. 2010 Jul;77(7):635-42
references: 20583277
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Mar 17;106(11):4307-12
references: 19251663
references: Trends Genet. 2001 Jan;17(1):23-8
references: 11163918
references: Ann Bot. 2008 Apr;101(6):747-57
references: 18339642
references: Methods Cell Biol. 1990;33:105-10
references: 1707478
references: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2011 Nov;61(2):413-24
references: 21708275
references: Ann Bot. 2005 Jan;95(1):255-60
references: 15596473
references: New Phytol. 2008;179(4):975-986
references: 18564303
references: Am Nat. 2019 Jun;193(6):755-772
references: 31094602
references: Am J Bot. 2004 Mar;91(3):490-8
references: 21653404
references: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2005 Aug;36(2):305-27
references: 15955512
references: Ann Bot. 2008 Feb;101(3):421-33
references: 18158307
references: Ann Bot. 2010 Apr;105(4):573-84
references: 20375204
references: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2004 Nov;33(2):289-99
references: 15336664
references: Bioinformatics. 2008 Sep 15;24(18):2098-100
references: 18678590
references: Am J Bot. 2003 Aug;90(8):1229-38
references: 21659223
references: Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2006 Nov;8(6):770-7
references: 17203433
references: New Phytol. 2012 Aug;195(3):688-698
references: 22686400
references: Genome Res. 2006 Oct;16(10):1262-9
references: 16963705
references: Ann Bot. 2010 Nov;106(5):775-90
references: 20929900
references: Am J Bot. 2005 Jul;92(7):1199-209
references: 21646142
references: Am J Bot. 2008 Oct;95(10):1297-306
references: 21632334
references: Genome Res. 2007 May;17(5):594-601
references: 17420184
references: Mol Phylogenet Evol. 2007 Aug;44(2):553-77
references: 17321763
references: Plant Biol (Stuttg). 2006 Nov;8(6):740-7
references: 17203429
references: Syst Biol. 2002 Jun;51(3):389-409
references: 12079641
references: Ann Bot. 2005 Jan;95(1):147-75
references: 15596464
references: Ann Bot. 2012 Jan;109(1):65-75
references: 22021815
references: Am J Bot. 2007 Nov;94(11):1837-52
references: 21636379
references: Nature. 2004 Oct 21;431(7011):931-45
references: 15496913
references: Ann Bot. 2005 Jan;95(1):133-46
references: 15596463
references: New Phytol. 2013 Nov;200(3):911-921
references: 23819630
references: PLoS One. 2009 Jul 07;4(7):e6164
references: 19582167
references: Ann Bot. 2005 Jan;95(1):207-17
references: 15596468
references: Nat Protoc. 2007;2(9):2233-44
references: 17853881
references: Am J Bot. 2010 Aug;97(8):1342-53
references: 21616887
references: Nature. 2005 Aug 11;436(7052):793-800
references: 16100779