Evidence map›Paper›PMID 2106661›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research1990

Novel families of interspersed repetitive elements from the human genome.

J Jurka

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 1990. 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
13.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Identification of an ancient endogenous retrovirus, predating the divergence of the placental mammals.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2013
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Tiggers and DNA transposon fossils in the human genome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 1996
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Prototypic sequences for human repetitive DNA.Journal of molecular evolution · 1992
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Distribution of interspersed repeats (Alu and Kpn) on NotI restriction fragments of human chromosome 21.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 1992
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

J JurkaLinus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine, Palo Alto, CA 94306.
Palo Alto Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Six novel families of interspersed repetitive elements have been detected in the available human DNA sequences using computer-assisted analyses. The estimated total number of elements in the reported six families is over 17,000. Sequences representative for each family range from approximately 150 to 650 base pairs (bp) in length and are predominantly (A + T)-rich. Sequences from four families contain stretches of patchy complementarity up to 45 bp long. Member of one of the families is likely be directly involved in a multigene deletion on chromosome 14. Two of the six sequence families are homologous to 'low reiteration frequency sequences' from monkey cells, detected first in defective variants of simian virus 40. Like Alu and L1 families, the newly discovered families are probably composed of pseudogenes derived from functional genes.

Indexed as

Repetitive Sequences, Nucleic AcidAnimalsBase SequenceBiological EvolutionDNAHaplorhiniHumansInformation SystemsMolecular Sequence DataDNA

Identifiers

PMID2106661
PMCPMC330213
OpenAlexW2063478450

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.