Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20686123›Full record

ArticleGenome research2010

Genomic signatures of germline gene expression.

Graham McVicker, Phil Green

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Why recombination hotspots?PLoS genetics · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Graham McVickerDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA.
Phil Green
University of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcribed regions in the human genome differ from adjacent intergenic regions in transposable element density, crossover rates, and asymmetric substitution and sequence composition patterns. We tested whether these differences reflect selection or are instead a byproduct of germline transcription, using publicly available gene expression data from a variety of germline and somatic tissues. Crossover rate shows a strong negative correlation with gene expression in meiotic tissues, suggesting that crossover is inhibited by transcription. Strand-biased composition (G+T content) and A → G versus T → C substitution asymmetry are both positively correlated with germline gene expression. We find no evidence for a strand bias in allele frequency data, implying that the substitution asymmetry reflects a mutation rather than a fixation bias. The density of transposable elements is positively correlated with germline expression, suggesting that such elements preferentially insert into regions that are actively transcribed. For each of the features examined, our analyses favor a nonselective explanation for the observed trends and point to the role of germline gene expression in shaping the mammalian genome.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingGenome, HumanAnimalsChromosome MappingCrossing Over, GeneticDNA Transposable ElementsFemaleFetusGene ExpressionGene FrequencyGerm CellsHumansMacacaMaleMeiosisMiceDNA Transposable Elements

Identifiers

PMID20686123
PMCPMC2963814
OpenAlexW2099530092

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.