ArticleGenome research2002
Domain-level differences in microsatellite distribution and content result from different relative rates of insertion and deletion mutations.
Article in Genome research, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.
- Translational and epitranscriptomic regulation of seed germination in Arabidopsis thaliana genotypes with contrasting dormancy phenotypes.Plant molecular biology · 2025Article
- Carbapenem-ResistantAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Prion protein gene mutation detection using long-read Nanopore sequencing.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Tryptophan 2, 3‑dioxygenase promotes proliferation, migration and invasion of ovarian cancer cells.Molecular medicine reports · 2021Article
- Comprehensive identification and characterization of simple sequence repeats based on the whole-genome sequences of 14 forest and fruit trees.Forestry research · 2021Article
- Inter- and intra-strain variability of tandem repeats in Mycoplasma pneumoniae based on next-generation sequencing data.Future microbiology · 2017Article
- DNA Replication Dynamics of the GGGGCC Repeat of the C9orf72 Gene.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2015Article
- Genome-wide analysis of tandem repeats in plants and green algae.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2014Article
- Mathematical and live meningococcal models for simple sequence repeat dynamics - coherent predictions and observations.PloS one · 2014Article
- Rapid microsatellite development for tree peony and its implications.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Genome-wide comparative analysis of simple sequence coding repeats among 25 insect species.Gene · 2012Article
- A study on mutational dynamics of simple sequence repeats in relation to mismatch repair system in prokaryotic genomes.Journal of molecular evolution · 2012Article
- Perspective on sequence evolution of microsatellite locus (CCG)n in Rv0050 gene from Mycobacterium tuberculosis.BMC evolutionary biology · 2011Article
- Joint inference of microsatellite mutation models, population history and genealogies using transdimensional Markov Chain Monte Carlo.Genetics · 2011Article
- Article
- Mutational dynamics of microsatellites.Molecular biotechnology · 2010Review
- Characterization of a deep-coverage carrot (Daucus carota L.) BAC library and initial analysis of BAC-end sequences.Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG · 2009Article
- InSatDb: a microsatellite database of fully sequenced insect genomes.Nucleic acids research · 2007Article
- Development of microsatellite markers and analysis of intraspecific genetic variability in chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.).TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Microsatellites (short tandem polynucleotide repeats) are found throughout eukaryotic genomes at frequencies many orders of magnitude higher than the frequencies predicted to occur by chance. Most of these microsatellites appear to have evolved in a generally neutral manner. In contrast, microsatellites are generally absent from bacterial genomes except in locations where they provide adaptive functional variability, and these appear to have evolved under selection. We demonstrate a mutational bias towards deletion (repeat contraction) in a native chromosomal microsatellite of the bacterium Mycoplasma gallisepticum, through the collection and analysis of independent mutations in the absence of natural selection. Using this and similar existing data from two other bacterial species and four eukaryotic species, we find strong evidence that deletion biases resulting in repeat contraction are common in bacteria, while eukaryotic microsatellites generally experience unbiased mutation or a bias towards insertion (repeat expansion). This difference in mutational bias suggests that eukaryotic microsatellites should generally expand wherever selection does not exclude them, whereas bacterial microsatellites should be driven to extinction by mutational pressure wherever they are not maintained by selection. This is consistent with observed bacterial and eukaryotic microsatellite distributions. Hence, mutational biases that differ between eukaryotes and bacteria can account for many of the observed differences in microsatellite DNA content and distribution found in these two groups of organisms.
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.