ArticleRNA (New York, N.Y.)2000
Sequence bias in edited kinetoplastid RNAs.
Article in RNA (New York, N.Y.), 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanism of U-insertion RNA editing in trypanosome mitochondria: characterization of RET2 functional domains by mutational analysis.Journal of molecular biology · 2010Article
- RNA editing in Trypanosoma brucei requires three different editosomes.Molecular and cellular biology · 2008Article
- Unexplained complexity of the mitochondrial genome and transcriptome in kinetoplastid flagellates.Current genetics · 2005Review
- Complete cycles of bloodstream trypanosome RNA editing in vitro.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2004Article
- Sequence and structural requirements for optimal guide RNA-directed insertional editing within Leishmania tarentolae.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2003Article
- RNA sequence and base pairing effects on insertion editing in Trypanosoma brucei.Molecular and cellular biology · 2002Article
- A mRNA determinant of gRNA-directed kinetoplastid editing.Nucleic acids research · 2001Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Uridylate residues (Us) are inserted and deleted at precise positions in mitochondrial transcripts of Trypanosoma brucei. These sequence changes are determined by interactions with small guide RNAs (gRNAs) that are complementary to edited sequence. Adenylate (A) and guanylate (G) residues in gRNAs across from editing sites pair with inserted Us. We evaluate whether sequence bias exists in the bases surrounding insertion sites. Upon analyzing all reported insertion sites in T. brucei, we find that the predicted base pairs flanking insertion sites show a strong bias. Specifically, guiding As and Gs tend to be flanked by cytosine residues and Us. This bias is expected if precise base-pair interactions at the editing site determine the number of inserted Us.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.