Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16147987›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2005

Open reading frames provide a rich pool of potential natural antisense transcripts in fungal genomes.

Stephan Steigele, Kay Nieselt

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% of its field
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Birth and death of gene overlaps in vertebrates.BMC evolutionary biology · 2007
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephan SteigeleWilhelm-Schickard-Institut f. Informatik, ZBIT-Center for Bioinformatics, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.
Kay Nieselt
University of Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural antisense transcripts are reported from all kingdoms of life and several recent reports of genomewide screens indicate that they are widely distributed. These transcripts seem to be involved in various biological functions and may govern the expression of their respective sense partner. Very little, however, is known about the degree of evolutionary conservation of antisense transcripts. Furthermore, none of the earlier analyses has studied whether antisense relationships are solely dual or involved in more complex relationships. Here we present a systematic screen for cis- and trans-located antisense transcripts based on open reading frames (ORFs) from five fungal species. The relative number of ORFs involved in antisense relationships varies greatly between the five species. In addition, other significant differences are found between the species, such as the mean length of the antisense region. The majority of trans-located antisense transcripts is found to be involved in complex relationships, resulting in highly connected networks. The analysis of the degree of evolutionary conservation of antisense transcripts shows that most antisense transcripts have no ortholog in any other species. An annotation of antisense transcripts based on Gene Ontology directs to common terms and shows that proteins of genes involved in antisense relationships preferentially localize to the nucleus with common functions in the regulation or maintenance of nucleic acids.

Indexed as

Genome, FungalOpen Reading FramesEvolution, MolecularGenomicsModels, GeneticRNA, AntisenseRNA, FungalTranscription, GeneticRNA, AntisenseRNA, Fungal

Identifiers

PMID16147987
PMCPMC1201330
OpenAlexW2128060380

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.