Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16469101›Full record

ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2006

Evolution of the NANOG pseudogene family in the human and chimpanzee genomes.

Daniel J Fairbanks, Peter J Maughan

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. A sister ofOpen biology · 2017
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Insights into theInternational journal of biological sciences · 2016
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Comparative analysis of pseudogenes across three phyla.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Homeobox genes in obsessive-compulsive disorder.American journal of medical genetics. Part B, Neuropsychiatric genetics : the official publication of the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics · 2012
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniel J FairbanksDepartment of Plant and Animal Sciences, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT 84602, USA. daniel_fairbanks@byu.edu
Peter J Maughan
Brigham Young University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe NANOG gene is expressed in mammalian embryonic stem cells where it maintains cellular pluripotency. An unusually large family of pseudogenes arose from it with one unprocessed and ten processed pseudogenes in the human genome. This article compares the NANOG gene and its pseudogenes in the human and chimpanzee genomes and derives an evolutionary history of this pseudogene family.

resultsThe NANOG gene and all pseudogenes except NANOGP8 are present at their expected orthologous chromosomal positions in the chimpanzee genome when compared to the human genome, indicating that their origins predate the human-chimpanzee divergence. Analysis of flanking DNA sequences demonstrates that NANOGP8 is absent from the chimpanzee genome.

conclusionBased on the most parsimonious ordering of inferred source-gene mutations, the deduced evolutionary origins for the NANOG pseudogene family in the human and chimpanzee genomes, in order of most ancient to most recent, are NANOGP6, NANOGP5, NANOGP3, NANOGP10, NANOGP2, NANOGP9, NANOGP7, NANOGP1, and NANOGP4. All of these pseudogenes were fixed in the genome of the human-chimpanzee common ancestor. NANOGP8 is the most recent pseudogene and it originated exclusively in the human lineage after the human-chimpanzee divergence. NANOGP1 is apparently an unprocessed pseudogene. Comparison of its sequence to the functional NANOG gene's reading frame suggests that this apparent pseudogene remained functional after duplication and, therefore, was subject to selection-driven conservation of its reading frame, and that it may retain some functionality or that its loss of function may be evolutionarily recent.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularMultigene FamilyPseudogenesAnimalsChromosome MappingChromosomes, Human, Pair 15DNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Mutational AnalysisFrameshift MutationGene DuplicationHomeodomain ProteinsHumansIntronsMammalsNanog Homeobox ProteinOpen Reading FramesDNA-Binding ProteinsHomeodomain ProteinsNanog Homeobox ProteinNANOG protein, human

Identifiers

PMID16469101
PMCPMC1457002
OpenAlexW1555883074

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.