Response to Tibayrenc and Ayala: Reproductive clonality in protozoan pathogens - Truth or artefact?

J. D. Ramírez, M. S. Llewellyn

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaRevisión corta

10 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Tibayrenc and Ayala raised several interesting objections to an opinion piece we recently published in Molecular Ecology (Ramirez & Llewellyn 2014). Our piece examined the value of an alternative perspective to their theory of predominant clonal evolution (PCE) on the prevalence and importance of genetic exchange in parasitic protozoa. In particular, our aim was to establish whether population genetic signatures of clonality in parasites were representative of true biological/evolutionary processes or artefacts of inadequate tools and inappropriate or inadequate sampling. We address Tibayrenc and Ayala's criticisms and make a detailed response. In doing so, we deny the consensus that Tibayrenc and Ayala claim around their views and dismiss much of the language which Tibayrenc and Ayala have introduced to this debate as either arbitrary or inaccurate. We strongly reject accusations that we misunderstood and misquoted the work of others. We do not think the PCE provides a useful framework for understanding existing parasite population structures. Furthermore, on the eve of the population genomic era, we strongly urge Tibayrenc and Ayala to wait for the forthcoming wealth of high-resolution data before considering whether it is appropriate to refine or re-iterate their PCE hypothesis.
Idioma originalEnglish (US)
Páginas (desde-hasta)5782-5784
Número de páginas3
PublicaciónMolecular Ecology
DOI
EstadoPublished - ene 1 2015

Huella dactilar

Clonal Evolution
Artifacts
Protozoa
artifact
pathogen
pathogens
parasite
Parasites
Biological Phenomena
parasites
Metagenomics
molecular ecology
Population Genetics
Ecology
Nuclear Family
population genetics
population structure
Consensus
genomics
Language

Citar esto

@article{906c01918a9144d0a47d2cd90b48bff1,
title = "Response to Tibayrenc and Ayala: Reproductive clonality in protozoan pathogens - Truth or artefact?",
abstract = "{\circledC} 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Tibayrenc and Ayala raised several interesting objections to an opinion piece we recently published in Molecular Ecology (Ramirez & Llewellyn 2014). Our piece examined the value of an alternative perspective to their theory of predominant clonal evolution (PCE) on the prevalence and importance of genetic exchange in parasitic protozoa. In particular, our aim was to establish whether population genetic signatures of clonality in parasites were representative of true biological/evolutionary processes or artefacts of inadequate tools and inappropriate or inadequate sampling. We address Tibayrenc and Ayala's criticisms and make a detailed response. In doing so, we deny the consensus that Tibayrenc and Ayala claim around their views and dismiss much of the language which Tibayrenc and Ayala have introduced to this debate as either arbitrary or inaccurate. We strongly reject accusations that we misunderstood and misquoted the work of others. We do not think the PCE provides a useful framework for understanding existing parasite population structures. Furthermore, on the eve of the population genomic era, we strongly urge Tibayrenc and Ayala to wait for the forthcoming wealth of high-resolution data before considering whether it is appropriate to refine or re-iterate their PCE hypothesis.",
author = "Ram{\'i}rez, {J. D.} and Llewellyn, {M. S.}",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/mec.13442",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "5782--5784",
journal = "Molecular Ecology",
issn = "0962-1083",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

Response to Tibayrenc and Ayala: Reproductive clonality in protozoan pathogens - Truth or artefact? / Ramírez, J. D.; Llewellyn, M. S.

En: Molecular Ecology, 01.01.2015, p. 5782-5784.

Resultado de la investigación: Contribución a RevistaRevisión corta

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response to Tibayrenc and Ayala: Reproductive clonality in protozoan pathogens - Truth or artefact?

AU - Ramírez, J. D.

AU - Llewellyn, M. S.

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Tibayrenc and Ayala raised several interesting objections to an opinion piece we recently published in Molecular Ecology (Ramirez & Llewellyn 2014). Our piece examined the value of an alternative perspective to their theory of predominant clonal evolution (PCE) on the prevalence and importance of genetic exchange in parasitic protozoa. In particular, our aim was to establish whether population genetic signatures of clonality in parasites were representative of true biological/evolutionary processes or artefacts of inadequate tools and inappropriate or inadequate sampling. We address Tibayrenc and Ayala's criticisms and make a detailed response. In doing so, we deny the consensus that Tibayrenc and Ayala claim around their views and dismiss much of the language which Tibayrenc and Ayala have introduced to this debate as either arbitrary or inaccurate. We strongly reject accusations that we misunderstood and misquoted the work of others. We do not think the PCE provides a useful framework for understanding existing parasite population structures. Furthermore, on the eve of the population genomic era, we strongly urge Tibayrenc and Ayala to wait for the forthcoming wealth of high-resolution data before considering whether it is appropriate to refine or re-iterate their PCE hypothesis.

AB - © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Tibayrenc and Ayala raised several interesting objections to an opinion piece we recently published in Molecular Ecology (Ramirez & Llewellyn 2014). Our piece examined the value of an alternative perspective to their theory of predominant clonal evolution (PCE) on the prevalence and importance of genetic exchange in parasitic protozoa. In particular, our aim was to establish whether population genetic signatures of clonality in parasites were representative of true biological/evolutionary processes or artefacts of inadequate tools and inappropriate or inadequate sampling. We address Tibayrenc and Ayala's criticisms and make a detailed response. In doing so, we deny the consensus that Tibayrenc and Ayala claim around their views and dismiss much of the language which Tibayrenc and Ayala have introduced to this debate as either arbitrary or inaccurate. We strongly reject accusations that we misunderstood and misquoted the work of others. We do not think the PCE provides a useful framework for understanding existing parasite population structures. Furthermore, on the eve of the population genomic era, we strongly urge Tibayrenc and Ayala to wait for the forthcoming wealth of high-resolution data before considering whether it is appropriate to refine or re-iterate their PCE hypothesis.

U2 - 10.1111/mec.13442

DO - 10.1111/mec.13442

M3 - Short survey

C2 - 26607215

SP - 5782

EP - 5784

JO - Molecular Ecology

JF - Molecular Ecology

SN - 0962-1083

ER -