Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21612594›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2011

Differential distribution of a SINE element in the Entamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar genomes: role of the LINE-encoded endonuclease.

Vandana Kumari, Rahul Sharma, Vijay P Yadav, Abhishek K Gupta, Alok Bhattacharya, Sudha Bhattacharya

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Evolutionary origins and impacts of genome architecture in ciliates.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2019
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Evolutionary genomics and population structure of Entamoeba histolytica.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2014
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Vandana KumariSchool of Environmental Sciences, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi 110067, India.
Rahul Sharma
Vijay P Yadav
Abhishek K Gupta
Alok Bhattacharya
Sudha Bhattacharya
Jawaharlal Nehru University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEntamoeba histolytica and Entamoeba dispar are closely related protistan parasites but while E. histolytica can be invasive, E. dispar is completely non pathogenic. Transposable elements constitute a significant portion of the genome in these species; there being three families of LINEs and SINEs. These elements can profoundly influence the expression of neighboring genes. Thus their genomic location can have important phenotypic consequences. A genome-wide comparison of the location of these elements in the E. histolytica and E. dispar genomes has not been carried out. It is also not known whether the retrotransposition machinery works similarly in both species. The present study was undertaken to address these issues.

resultsHere we extracted all genomic occurrences of full-length copies of EhSINE1 in the E. histolytica genome and matched them with the homologous regions in E. dispar, and vice versa, wherever it was possible to establish synteny. We found that only about 20% of syntenic sites were occupied by SINE1 in both species. We checked whether the different genomic location in the two species was due to differences in the activity of the LINE-encoded endonuclease which is required for nicking the target site. We found that the endonucleases of both species were essentially very similar, both in their kinetic properties and in their substrate sequence specificity. Hence the differential distribution of SINEs in these species is not likely to be influenced by the endonuclease. Further we found that the physical properties of the DNA sequences adjoining the insertion sites were similar in both species.

conclusionsOur data shows that the basic retrotransposition machinery is conserved in these sibling species. SINEs may indeed have occupied all of the insertion sites in the genome of the common ancestor of E. histolytica and E. dispar but these may have been subsequently lost from some locations. Alternatively, SINE expansion took place after the divergence of the two species. The absence of SINE1 in 80% of syntenic loci could affect the phenotype of the two species, including their pathogenic properties, which needs to be explored.

Indexed as

Amino Acid SequenceBase SequenceBiocatalysisBuffersCloning, MolecularDNA Breaks, Single-StrandedDNA, SuperhelicalEndonucleasesEntamoeba histolyticaGenetic LociGenome, ProtozoanKineticsLong Interspersed Nucleotide ElementsMolecular Sequence DataPeptide FragmentsProtein Structure, TertiaryBuffersDNA, SuperhelicalEndonucleasesPeptide Fragments

Identifiers

PMID21612594
PMCPMC3118788
OpenAlexW2002177738

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.