ArticleGenomics2009
Estimating the age of retrotransposon subfamilies using maximum likelihood.
Article in Genomics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- TEPEAK: A novel method for identifying and characterizing polymorphic transposable elements in non-model species populations.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- The role of transposon activity in shapingGenome research · 2025Article
- Haplotype-resolved diverse human genomes and integrated analysis of structural variation.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2021Article
- Birth and Death of LTR-Retrotransposons inGenetics · 2018Article
- Article
- Inference of transposable element ancestry.PLoS genetics · 2014Article
- Transduction-specific ATLAS reveals a cohort of highly active L1 retrotransposons in human populations.Human mutation · 2013Article
- Phylogenetic and DNA methylation analysis reveal novel regions of variable methylation in the mouse IAP class of transposons.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Article
- Evolution of stress-regulated gene expression in duplicate genes of Arabidopsis thaliana.PLoS genetics · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We present a maximum likelihood model to estimate the age of retrotransposon subfamilies. This method is designed around a master gene model which assumes a constant retrotransposition rate. The statistical properties of this model and an ad hoc estimation procedure are compared using two simulated data sets. We also test whether each estimation procedure is robust to violation of the master gene model. According to our results, both estimation procedures are accurate under the master gene model. While both methods tend to overestimate ages under the intermediate model, the maximum likelihood estimate is significantly less inflated than the ad hoc estimate. We estimate the ages of two subfamilies of human-specific LINE-I insertions using both estimation procedures. By calculating confidence intervals around the maximum likelihood estimate, our model can both provide an estimate of retrotransposon subfamily age and describe the range of subfamily ages consistent with the data.
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.