Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23418180›Full record

ArticleGenome biology and evolution2013

Genome-Level Analysis of Selective Constraint without Apparent Sequence Conservation.

Olga A Vakhrusheva, Georgii A Bazykin, Alexey S Kondrashov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Comparative transcriptomics in human and mouse.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2017
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Defining functional DNA elements in the human genome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Review
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

3 authors.

Olga A VakhrushevaDepartment of Bioengineering and Bioinformatics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia.
Georgii A Bazykin
Alexey S Kondrashov

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conservation of function can be accompanied by obvious similarity of homologous sequences which may persist for billions of years (Iyer LM, Leipe DD, Koonin EV, Aravind L. 2004. Evolutionary history and higher order classification of AAA+ ATPases. J Struct Biol. 146:11-31.). However, presumably homologous segments of noncoding DNA can also retain their ancestral function even after their sequences diverge beyond recognition (Fisher S, Grice EA, Vinton RM, Bessling SL, McCallion AS. 2006. Conservation of RET regulatory function from human to zebrafish without sequence similarity. Science 312:276-279.). To investigate this phenomenon at the genomic scale, we studied homologous introns in a quartet of insect species, and in a quartet of vertebrate species. Each quartet consisted of two pairs of moderately distant genomes, with a much larger evolutionary distance between the pairs. In both quartets, we found that introns that carry a regulatory segment or a conserved segment in the first pair tend to carry a conserved segment in the second pair, even though no similarity of these segments could be detected between the two pairs. Furthermore, introns from one pair that are preserved in the other pair tend to carry a conserved segment within the first pair, and be longer in the first pair, compared with the introns that were lost between pairs, even though no similarity between pairs could be detected in such preserved introns. These results indicate that selective constraint, presumably caused by conservation of the ancestral function, often persists even after the homologous DNA segments become unalignable.

Identifiers

PMID23418180
PMCPMC3622294

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.