Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21914793›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of biological chemistry2011

Keeping the soma free of transposons: programmed DNA elimination in ciliates.

Ursula E Schoeberl, Kazufumi Mochizuki

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of biological chemistry, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Delete and survive: strategies of programmed genetic material elimination in eukaryotes.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2022
    Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The emerging diversity of transpososome architectures.Quarterly reviews of biophysics · 2012
    Review
  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.

Ursula E SchoeberlInstitute of Molecular Biotechnology, Austrian Academy of Sciences (IMBA), A-1030 Vienna, Austria.
Kazufumi Mochizuki
Austrian Academy of Sciences · AT

Funding

European Research Council 204986
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many transposon-related sequences are removed from the somatic macronucleus of ciliates during sexual reproduction. In the ciliate Tetrahymena, an RNAi-related mechanism produces small noncoding RNAs that induce heterochromatin formation, which is followed by DNA elimination. Because RNAi-related mechanisms repress transposon activities in a variety of eukaryotes, the DNA elimination mechanism of ciliates might have evolved from these types of transposon-silencing mechanisms. Nuclear dimorphism allows ciliates to identify any DNA that has invaded the germ-line micronucleus using small RNAs and a whole genome comparison of the micronucleus and the somatic macronucleus.

Indexed as

DNA, ProtozoanDNA Transposable ElementsHeterochromatinMacronucleusMicronucleus, GermlineTetrahymenaDNA, ProtozoanDNA Transposable ElementsHeterochromatin

Identifiers

PMID21914793
PMCPMC3199450
OpenAlexW2000509223

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.