Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16083503›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2005

A systematic search for new mammalian noncoding RNAs indicates little conserved intergenic transcription.

Tomas Babak, Benjamin J Blencowe, Timothy R Hughes

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
–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

45 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Exosomal RNAs: Novel Potential Biomarkers for Diseases-A Review.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. LncRNAInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Long Non-Coding RNAs in Metabolic Organs and Energy Homeostasis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Investigating long noncoding RNAs using animal models.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2016
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The case for junk DNA.PLoS genetics · 2014
    Article
  20. Review
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

3 authors.

Tomas BabakBanting and Best Department of Medical Research, 112 College St., Toronto, ON M5G 1L6, Canada. tomas.babak@utoronto.ca
Benjamin J Blencowe
Timothy R Hughes

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystematic identification and functional characterization of novel types of noncoding (nc)RNA in genomes is more difficult than it is for protein coding mRNAs, since ncRNAs typically do not possess sequence features such as splicing or translation signals, or long open reading frames. Recent "tiling" microarray studies have reported that a surprisingly larger proportion of mammalian genomes is transcribed than was previously anticipated. However, these non-genic transcripts often appear to be low in abundance, and their functional significance is not known.

resultsTo systematically search for functional ncRNAs, we designed microarrays to detect 3,478 intergenic and intronic sequences that are conserved between the human, mouse, and rat genomes, and that score highly by other criteria that characterize ncRNAs. We probed these arrays with total RNA isolated from 16 wild-type mouse tissues. Among 55 candidates for highly-expressed novel ncRNAs tested by northern blotting, eight were confirmed as small, highly-and ubiquitously-expressed RNAs in mouse. Of the eight, five were also detected in rat tissues, but none were detected at appreciable levels in human tissues or cultured cells.

conclusionSince the sequence and expression of most known coding transcripts and functional ncRNAs is conserved between human and mouse, the lack of northern-detectable expression in human cells and tissues of the novel mouse and rat ncRNAs that we identified suggests that they are not functional or possibly have rodent-specific functions. Our results confirm that relatively little of the intergenic sequence conserved between human, mouse and rat is transcribed at high levels in mammalian tissues, possibly suggesting a limited role for transcribed intergenic and intronic sequences as independent functional elements.

Indexed as

Genetic TechniquesTranscription, GeneticAnimalsBlotting, NorthernComputational BiologyDNA, IntergenicDNA PrimersGenomeHeLa CellsHumansIntronsMiceNucleic Acid HybridizationOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisOpen Reading FramesRatsDNA, IntergenicDNA PrimersRNARNA, MessengerRNA, Untranslated

Identifiers

PMID16083503
PMCPMC1199595

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.