ArticleGenome biology2012
Mutation spectrum of Drosophila CNVs revealed by breakpoint sequencing.
Article in Genome biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Low-input PacBio sequencing generates high-quality individual fly genomes and characterizes mutational processes.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Delayed host mortality and immune response upon infection withInfection and immunity · 2023Article
- Noncanonical DNA structures are drivers of genome evolution.Trends in genetics : TIG · 2023Review
- Dosage sensitivity and exon shuffling shape the landscape of polymorphic duplicates in Drosophila and humans.Nature ecology & evolution · 2022Article
- Synaptonemal Complex-DeficientG3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2020Article
- Accelerated rates of large-scale mutations in the presence of copper and nickel.Genome research · 2019Article
- Article
- Diversity and regulatory impact of copy number variation in the primate Macaca fascicularis.BMC genomics · 2017Article
- Extensive local adaptation within the chemosensory system following Drosophila melanogaster's global expansion.Nature communications · 2016Article
- Evidence for the fixation of gene duplications by positive selection in Drosophila.Genome research · 2016Article
- Article
- Global diversity lines - a five-continent reference panel of sequenced Drosophila melanogaster strains.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2015Article
- Landscape of standing variation for tandem duplications in Drosophila yakuba and Drosophila simulans.Molecular biology and evolution · 2014Article
- DNA structure matters.Genome medicine · 2013Article
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
backgroundThe detailed study of breakpoints associated with copy number variants (CNVs) can elucidate the mutational mechanisms that generate them and the comparison of breakpoints across species can highlight differences in genomic architecture that may lead to lineage-specific differences in patterns of CNVs. Here, we provide a detailed analysis of Drosophila CNV breakpoints and contrast it with similar analyses recently carried out for the human genome.
resultsBy applying split-read methods to a total of 10x coverage of 454 shotgun sequence across nine lines of D. melanogaster and by re-examining a previously published dataset of CNVs detected using tiling arrays, we identified the precise breakpoints of more than 600 insertions, deletions, and duplications. Contrasting these CNVs with those found in humans showed that in both taxa CNV breakpoints fall into three classes: blunt breakpoints; simple breakpoints associated with microhomology; and breakpoints with additional nucleotides inserted/deleted and no microhomology. In both taxa CNV breakpoints are enriched with non-B DNA sequence structures, which may impair DNA replication and/or repair. However, in contrast to human genomes, non-allelic homologous-recombination (NAHR) plays a negligible role in CNV formation in Drosophila. In flies, non-homologous repair mechanisms are responsible for simple, recurrent, and complex CNVs, including insertions of de novo sequence as large as 60 bp.
conclusionsHumans and Drosophila differ considerably in the importance of homology-based mechanisms for the formation of CNVs, likely as a consequence of the differences in the abundance and distribution of both segmental duplications and transposable elements between the two genomes.
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.