Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17335345›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2007

The (in)dependence of alternative splicing and gene duplication.

David Talavera, Christine Vogel, Modesto Orozco, Sarah A Teichmann, Xavier de la Cruz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Alternative splicing and the evolution of phenotypic novelty.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Polyploidy and novelty: Gottlieb's legacy.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2014
    Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

David TalaveraMolecular Modeling and Bioinformatics Unit, Parc Científic de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Christine Vogel
Modesto Orozco
Sarah A Teichmann
Xavier de la Cruz
MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology · GBBarcelona Biomedical Research Park · ESBarcelona Supercomputing Center · ESInstitució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats · ES

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_U105161047
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Alternative splicing (AS) and gene duplication (GD) both are processes that diversify the protein repertoire. Recent examples have shown that sequence changes introduced by AS may be comparable to those introduced by GD. In addition, the two processes are inversely correlated at the genomic scale: large gene families are depleted in splice variants and vice versa. All together, these data strongly suggest that both phenomena result in interchangeability between their effects. Here, we tested the extent to which this applies with respect to various protein characteristics. The amounts of AS and GD per gene are anticorrelated even when accounting for different gene functions or degrees of sequence divergence. In contrast, the two processes appear to be independent in their influence on variation in mRNA expression. Further, we conducted a detailed comparison of the effect of sequence changes in both alternative splice variants and gene duplicates on protein structure, in particular the size, location, and types of sequence substitutions and insertions/deletions. We find that, in general, alternative splicing affects protein sequence and structure in a more drastic way than gene duplication and subsequent divergence. Our results reveal an interesting paradox between the anticorrelation of AS and GD at the genomic level, and their impact at the protein level, which shows little or no equivalence in terms of effects on protein sequence, structure, and function. We discuss possible explanations that relate to the order of appearance of AS and GD in a gene family, and to the selection pressure imposed by the environment.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGene DuplicationModels, GeneticAlternative SplicingBase SequenceComputer SimulationDNA Mutational AnalysisGenetic VariationMolecular Sequence DataProteomeSequence Analysis, DNAProteome

Identifiers

PMID17335345
PMCPMC1808492
OpenAlexW2059338023

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.