Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12537575›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2002

Assessing the impact of comparative genomic sequence data on the functional annotation of the Drosophila genome.

Casey M Bergman, Barret D Pfeiffer, Diego E Rincón-Limas, Roger A Hoskins, Andreas Gnirke, Chris J Mungall, Adrienne M Wang, Brent Kronmiller, Joanne Pacleb, Soo Park and 7 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

75 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The evolution of tRNA genes in Drosophila.Genome biology and evolution · 2010
    Article
  20. Article

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Casey M BergmanBerkeley Drosophila Genome Project, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, One Cyclotron Road, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA.
Barret D Pfeiffer
Diego E Rincón-Limas
Roger A Hoskins
Andreas Gnirke
Chris J Mungall
Adrienne M Wang
Brent Kronmiller
Joanne Pacleb
Soo Park
Mark Stapleton
Kenneth Wan
Reed A George
Pieter J de Jong
Juan Botas
Gerald M Rubin
Susan E Celniker

Funding

FLYBASE: A DROSOPHILA RELATIONAL DATABASEP41HG000739 · NHGRI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI GELBART, WILLIAM MARTIN · 1992 to 2014
$56.6M
Resource Project CoreU41HG000739 · NHGRI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY · PI PERRIMON, NORBERT · 2014 to 2022
$32.3M
TECHNICAL COREP50HG000750 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI RUBIN, GERALD M. · 1992 to 2002
$25.5M
STUDIES OF LIPOPROTEINS AND LIPID PROTEIN INTERACTIONST32HL007279 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIF-LAWRENC BERKELEY LAB · PI RUBIN, EDWARD M · 1985 to 2007
$1.4M
NHGRI NIH HHS HG00739NHGRI NIH HHS HG00750NHGRI NIH HHS P41 HG000739NHGRI NIH HHS U41 HG000739NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007279NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL07279
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIt is widely accepted that comparative sequence data can aid the functional annotation of genome sequences; however, the most informative species and features of genome evolution for comparison remain to be determined.

resultsWe analyzed conservation in eight genomic regions (apterous, even-skipped, fushi tarazu, twist, and Rhodopsins 1, 2, 3 and 4) from four Drosophila species (D. erecta, D. pseudoobscura, D. willistoni, and D. littoralis) covering more than 500 kb of the D. melanogaster genome. All D. melanogaster genes (and 78-82% of coding exons) identified in divergent species such as D. pseudoobscura show evidence of functional constraint. Addition of a third species can reveal functional constraint in otherwise non-significant pairwise exon comparisons. Microsynteny is largely conserved, with rearrangement breakpoints, novel transposable element insertions, and gene transpositions occurring in similar numbers. Rates of amino-acid substitution are higher in uncharacterized genes relative to genes that have previously been studied. Conserved non-coding sequences (CNCSs) tend to be spatially clustered with conserved spacing between CNCSs, and clusters of CNCSs can be used to predict enhancer sequences.

conclusionsOur results provide the basis for choosing species whose genome sequences would be most useful in aiding the functional annotation of coding and cis-regulatory sequences in Drosophila. Furthermore, this work shows how decoding the spatial organization of conserved sequences, such as the clustering of CNCSs, can complement efforts to annotate eukaryotic genomes on the basis of sequence conservation alone.

Indexed as

GenomeAnimalsComputational BiologyConserved SequenceDatabases, GeneticDrosophilaDrosophila melanogasterEvolution, MolecularForecastingGene RearrangementGenes, InsectGenetic VariationRNA, MessengerSequence Analysis, DNASpecies SpecificityUntranslated RegionsRNA, MessengerUntranslated Regions

Identifiers

PMID12537575
PMCPMC151188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.