ArticlePloS one2012
A simple method for analyzing exome sequencing data shows distinct levels of nonsynonymous variation for human immune and nervous system genes.
Article in PloS one, 2012. 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.
- The population genomics of rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) based on whole-genome sequences.Genome research · 2016Article
- Improved variant calling accuracy by merging replicates in whole-exome sequencing studies.BioMed research international · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To measure the strength of natural selection that acts upon single nucleotide variants (SNVs) in a set of human genes, we calculate the ratio between nonsynonymous SNVs (nsSNVs) per nonsynonymous site and synonymous SNVs (sSNVs) per synonymous site. We transform this ratio with a respective factor f that corrects for the bias of synonymous sites towards transitions in the genetic code and different mutation rates for transitions and transversions. This method approximates the relative density of nsSNVs (rdnsv) in comparison with the neutral expectation as inferred from the density of sSNVs. Using SNVs from a diploid genome and 200 exomes, we apply our method to immune system genes (ISGs), nervous system genes (NSGs), randomly sampled genes (RSGs), and gene ontology annotated genes. The estimate of rdnsv in an individual exome is around 20% for NSGs and 30-40% for ISGs and RSGs. This smaller rdnsv of NSGs indicates overall stronger purifying selection. To quantify the relative shift of nsSNVs towards rare variants, we next fit a linear regression model to the estimates of rdnsv over different SNV allele frequency bins. The obtained regression models show a negative slope for NSGs, ISGs and RSGs, supporting an influence of purifying selection on the frequency spectrum of segregating nsSNVs. The y-intercept of the model predicts rdnsv for an allele frequency close to 0. This parameter can be interpreted as the proportion of nonsynonymous sites where mutations are tolerated to segregate with an allele frequency notably greater than 0 in the population, given the performed normalization of the observed nsSNV to sSNV ratio. A smaller y-intercept is displayed by NSGs, indicating more nonsynonymous sites under strong negative selection. This predicts more monogenically inherited or de-novo mutation diseases that affect the nervous system.
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.