Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25069760›Full record

ReviewChromosoma2014

Facts and artifacts in studies of gene expression in aneuploids and sex chromosomes.

James A Birchler

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Chromosoma, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Expanding the classical paradigm: what we have learnt from vertebrates about sex chromosome evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Review
  6. Do male and female heterogamety really differ in expression regulation? Lack of global dosage balance in pygopodid geckos.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Global impacts of chromosomal imbalance on gene expression inProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Dosage compensation of the sex chromosomes and autosomes.Seminars in cell & developmental biology · 2016
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

1 author.

James A BirchlerUniversity of Missouri, Columbia, MO, 65211, USA, birchlerj@missouri.edu.

Funding

Dosage Compensation in DrosophilaR01GM068042 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI BIRCHLER, JAMES A · 2003 to 2012
$2.0M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM068042
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies of gene expression in aneuploids have often made the assumption that measurements of RNA abundance from the varied chromosome will establish whether there is a dosage effect or compensation. Typical procedures of RNA isolation and use of equal amounts of RNA for quantitative estimates will not measure the total transcriptome size nor the absolute expression levels per cell. Use of internal endogenous standards or averages from unvaried chromosomes for normalizations makes the assumption that there are no global modulations across the genome. However, studies that use controls to test these assumptions reveal that there are in fact often modulations on all chromosomes. The same caveats apply to gene expression studies of sex chromosomes, which also involve changes in dosage of a small portion of the genome. Here, we describe some of the pitfalls of studies of aneuploidy and sex chromosome gene expression and review methods that have been used to avoid them.

Indexed as

AneuploidyGene ExpressionAnimalsFemaleHumansMaleSex Chromosomes

Identifiers

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.