ArticleBMC bioinformatics2004
Simple statistical models predict C-to-U edited sites in plant mitochondrial RNA.
Article in BMC bioinformatics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assembly and comparative analysis of the complete mitochondrial genome of Abies beshanzuensis: insights into conservation genomics of a critically endangered fir.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
- Complete sequencing of the mitochondrial genome of tea plantFrontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- Article
- Comparative analysis of the whole mitochondrial genomes of four species in sect. Chrysantha (Camellia L.), endemic taxa in China.BMC plant biology · 2024Article
- RNA Editing in Chloroplast: Advancements and Opportunities.Current issues in molecular biology · 2022Review
- Random forest versus logistic regression: a large-scale benchmark experiment.BMC bioinformatics · 2018Article
- Towards a comprehensive picture of C-to-U RNA editing sites in angiosperm mitochondria.Plant molecular biology · 2018Article
- Intervention in prediction measure: a new approach to assessing variable importance for random forests.BMC bioinformatics · 2017Article
- Article
- An AUC-based permutation variable importance measure for random forests.BMC bioinformatics · 2013Article
- PREPACT 2.0: Predicting C-to-U and U-to-C RNA Editing in Organelle Genome Sequences with Multiple References and Curated RNA Editing Annotation.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2013Article
- Editing site analysis in a gymnosperm mitochondrial genome reveals similarities with angiosperm mitochondrial genomes.Current genetics · 2010Article
- A study of new Arabidopsis chloroplast RNA editing mutants reveals general features of editing factors and their target sites.The Plant cell · 2009Article
- RESOPS: a database for analyzing the correspondence of RNA editing sites to protein three-dimensional structures.Plant & cell physiology · 2009Article
- Extreme polymorphism in a vaccine antigen and risk of clinical malaria: implications for vaccine development.Science translational medicine · 2009Article
- The PREP suite: predictive RNA editors for plant mitochondrial genes, chloroplast genes and user-defined alignments.Nucleic acids research · 2009Article
- CURE-Chloroplast: a chloroplast C-to-U RNA editing predictor for seed plants.BMC bioinformatics · 2009Article
- A molecular footprint of limb loss: sequence variation of the autopodial identity gene Hoxa-13.Journal of molecular evolution · 2008Article
- Characteristics and prediction of RNA editing sites in transcripts of the Moss Takakia lepidozioides chloroplast.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2008Article
- Mitochondrial biogenesis and function in Arabidopsis.The arabidopsis book · 2008Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRNA editing is the process whereby an RNA sequence is modified from the sequence of the corresponding DNA template. In the mitochondria of land plants, some cytidines are converted to uridines before translation. Despite substantial study, the molecular biological mechanism by which C-to-U RNA editing proceeds remains relatively obscure, although several experimental studies have implicated a role for cis-recognition. A highly non-random distribution of nucleotides is observed in the immediate vicinity of edited sites (within 20 nucleotides 5' and 3'), but no precise consensus motif has been identified.
resultsData for analysis were derived from the the complete mitochondrial genomes of Arabidopsis thaliana, Brassica napus, and Oryza sativa; additionally, a combined data set of observations across all three genomes was generated. We selected datasets based on the 20 nucleotides 5' and the 20 nucleotides 3' of edited sites and an equivalently sized and appropriately constructed null-set of non-edited sites. We used tree-based statistical methods and random forests to generate models of C-to-U RNA editing based on the nucleotides surrounding the edited/non-edited sites and on the estimated folding energies of those regions. Tree-based statistical methods based on primary sequence data surrounding edited/non-edited sites and estimates of free energy of folding yield models with optimistic re-substitution-based estimates of approximately 0.71 accuracy, approximately 0.64 sensitivity, and approximately 0.88 specificity. Random forest analysis yielded better models and more exact performance estimates with approximately 0.74 accuracy, approximately 0.72 sensitivity, and approximately 0.81 specificity for the combined observations.
conclusionsSimple models do moderately well in predicting which cytidines will be edited to uridines, and provide the first quantitative predictive models for RNA edited sites in plant mitochondria. Our analysis shows that the identity of the nucleotide -1 to the edited C and the estimated free energy of folding for a 41 nt region surrounding the edited C are the most important variables that distinguish most edited from non-edited sites. However, the results suggest that primary sequence data and simple free energy of folding calculations alone are insufficient to make highly accurate predictions.
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.