Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24809961›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2014

Genomic landscape of human, bat, and ex vivo DNA transposon integrations.

Rebeca Campos-Sánchez, Aurélie Kapusta, Cédric Feschotte, Francesca Chiaromonte, Kateryna D Makova

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Coevolution between transposable elements and recombination.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rebeca Campos-SánchezGenetics Program, The Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, Penn State University, University Park, PA.
Aurélie KapustaDepartment of Human Genetics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT.
Cédric FeschotteDepartment of Human Genetics, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT.
Francesca ChiaromonteCenter for Medical Genomics, The Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, Penn State University, University Park, PADepartment of Statistics, Penn State University, University Park, PA.
Kateryna D MakovaCenter for Medical Genomics, The Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, Penn State University, University Park, PADepartment of Biology, Penn State University, University Park, PA kdm16@psu.edu.
Pennsylvania State University · USUniversity of Utah · US

Funding

Penn State Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000127 · NCATS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV HERSHEY MED CTR · PI SINOWAY, LAWRENCE I · 2012 to 2015
$17.1M
Human DNA transposons: evolutionary history and genomic impactR01GM077582 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF UTAH · PI FESCHOTTE, CEDRIC · 2007 to 2015
$1.4M
Computational and Biochemical Analysis of Microsatellite Life CycleR01GM087472 · NIGMS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI ECKERT, KRISTIN A, MAKOVA, KATERYNA · 2009 to 2012
$1.4M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000127NIGMS NIH HHS GM077582NIGMS NIH HHS GM087472NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM077582NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM087472
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The integration and fixation preferences of DNA transposons, one of the major classes of eukaryotic transposable elements, have never been evaluated comprehensively on a genome-wide scale. Here, we present a detailed study of the distribution of DNA transposons in the human and bat genomes. We studied three groups of DNA transposons that integrated at different evolutionary times: 1) ancient (>40 My) and currently inactive human elements, 2) younger (<40 My) bat elements, and 3) ex vivo integrations of piggyBat and Sleeping Beauty elements in HeLa cells. Although the distribution of ex vivo elements reflected integration preferences, the distribution of human and (to a lesser extent) bat elements was also affected by selection. We used regression techniques (linear, negative binomial, and logistic regression models with multiple predictors) applied to 20-kb and 1-Mb windows to investigate how the genomic landscape in the vicinity of DNA transposons contributes to their integration and fixation. Our models indicate that genomic landscape explains 16-79% of variability in DNA transposon genome-wide distribution. Importantly, we not only confirmed previously identified predictors (e.g., DNA conformation and recombination hotspots) but also identified several novel predictors (e.g., signatures of double-strand breaks and telomere hexamer). Ex vivo integrations showed a bias toward actively transcribed regions. Older DNA transposons were located in genomic regions scarce in most conserved elements-likely reflecting purifying selection. Our study highlights how DNA transposons are integral to the evolution of bat and human genomes, and has implications for the development of DNA transposon assays for gene therapy and mutagenesis applications.

Indexed as

DNA Transposable ElementsEvolution, MolecularAnimalsChiropteraGenetic VariationGenomeHeLa CellsHumansModels, GeneticMutagenesis, InsertionalRegression AnalysisDNA Transposable ElementsDNA transposonshuman genomeintegration preferenceslogistic regressionmultiple linear regressionMyotis lucifugus genomenegative binomial regression

Identifiers

PMID24809961
PMCPMC4069622
OpenAlexW2114548956

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.