ArticleBMC genomics2009
Genomic evidence for non-random endemic populations of decaying exons from mammalian genes.
Article in BMC genomics, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computational Methods for Pseudogene Annotation Based on Sequence Homology.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFunctional diversification of genes in mammalian genomes is engendered by a number of processes, e.g., gene duplication and alternative splicing. Gene duplication is classically discussed as leading to neofunctionalization (generation of new functions), subfunctionalization (generation of a varied function), or pseudogenization (loss of the gene and its function).
resultsHere, we focus on the process of pseudogenization, but specifically for individual exons from genes. It is at present unclear to what extent pseudogenization of individual exon duplications affects gene evolution, i.e., is it a random phenomenon, or is it associated with specific types of genes and encoded proteins, and positions in gene structures? We gathered genomic evidence for pseudogenic exons (PsiEs, i.e., exons disabled by frameshifts and premature stop codons), to examine for significant trends in their distribution across four mammalian genomes (specifically human, cow, mouse and rat). Across these four genomes, we observed a consistent population of PsiEs, associated with 0.4-1.0% of genes. These PsiE populations exhibit codon substitution patterns that are typical of an endemic population of decaying sequences. In human, PsiEs have significant over-representation for functional categories related to 'ion binding' and 'nucleic-acid binding', compared to duplicated exons in general. Also, PsiEs tend to be associated with some protein domains that are abundant generally, e.g., Zinc-finger and immunoglobulin protein domains, but not others, e.g., EGF-like domains. Positionally, PsiEs are also significantly associated with the 5' end of genes, but despite this, individual stop codons are positioned so that there is significant avoidance of potential targeting to nonsense-mediated decay. In human, PsiEs are often associated with alternative splicing (in 22 out of 284 genes with PsiEs in their milieu), and can have different parts of their sequence differentially spliced in alternative transcripts. Some unusual cases of PsiEs embedded within 5' and 3' non-coding exons are observed.
conclusionOur results indicate the types of genes that harbour PsiEs, and demonstrate that PsiEs have non-random distribution within gene structures. These PsiEs may function in gene regulation through generation of transcribed pseudogenes, or regulatory alternate transcripts.
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.