<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
    xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:extra="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
    xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
    <channel rdf:about="http://www.biology-direct.com/feeds/articlecomments?arxId=1745-6150-3-50&amp;format=rss&amp;version=&amp;quantity=">
        <title>Article Comments - 'Are we degenerate tetraploids? More genomes, new facts'</title>
        <link>http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50/comments</link>
        <description>The latest comments on the article 'Are we degenerate tetraploids? More genomes, new facts'</description>
        <dc:date>2008-12-22T10:23:46Z</dc:date>
        <items>
            <rdf:Seq>
                                <rdf:li resource="http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50" />
                                <rdf:li resource="http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50" />
                            </rdf:Seq>
        </items>
                 <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </channel>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50/comments#325622">
        <title>1R or 2R</title>
        <link>http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50/comments#325622</link>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Among the &quot;Whole genome duplication&quot; scenario proponents there are two versions of Ohno,s hypothesis, some has suggested two round (2R) scenario (leading to octaploids), whereas others only one round  (1R) of whole genome duplication (leading to tetraploids, please see Ref 25 of this manuscript, and also see Gu et al  2002 Nat.Genet.31, 205-209 and Durand Dannie TRENDS in Genetics Vol.19 No1 Jan 2003).  The title of the manuscript refers to 1R. However in the text I provide a critical overview of 2R also (please see in particular the sections &amp;#8220;Paralogy regions in the Human genome&amp;#8221; and &amp;#8220;HOX cluster duplication and the history of vertebrate genome evolution&amp;#8221;.  I can hope this comment will let the readers to understand the title of this manuscript. &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;I am the author of this manuscript. &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
                <dc:creator>Amir Abbasi</dc:creator>
                <dc:date>2008-12-22T10:23:46Z</dc:date>
        <prism:references>http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50</prism:references>
        <prism:person>Abbasi</prism:person>
        <prism:publicationName>Biology Direct</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:volume>3</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>50</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>Wed Dec 10 10:05:07 GMT 2008</prism:publicationDate>
        <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <item rdf:about="http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50/comments#324611">
        <title>octaploids</title>
        <link>http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50/comments#324611</link>
        <description>&lt;p&gt;Two rounds of genome duplication would generate from diploids -&amp;gt; tetraploids and from tetraploids -&amp;gt; octaploids. &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;So I do not understand the title of the paper. &amp;lt;br&amp;gt;&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;In fact there is a paper on this issue that indeed refers to octaploidy.&amp;lt;br&amp;gt;TJ Gibson and J Spring (2000) Evidence in favour of ancient octaploidy in the vertebrate genome, Biochem Soc Trans 28:259&amp;#8211;264.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
                <dc:creator>Herman Van Eck</dc:creator>
                <dc:date>2008-12-16T15:57:01Z</dc:date>
        <prism:references>http://www.biology-direct.com/content/3/1/50</prism:references>
        <prism:person>Abbasi</prism:person>
        <prism:publicationName>Biology Direct</prism:publicationName>
        <prism:volume>3</prism:volume>
        <prism:startingPage>50</prism:startingPage>
        <prism:publicationDate>Wed Dec 10 10:05:07 GMT 2008</prism:publicationDate>
        <cc:license rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/" />
    </item>
        <cc:License rdf:about="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/">
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Reproduction" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#Distribution" />
        <cc:permits rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/ns#DerivativeWorks" />
    </cc:License>
</rdf:RDF>

