Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25797922›Full record

ReviewMolecular phylogenetics and evolution2015

A survey of transposable element classification systems--a call for a fundamental update to meet the challenge of their diversity and complexity.

Benoît Piégu, Solenne Bire, Peter Arensburger, Yves Bigot

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular phylogenetics and evolution, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed
22.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 161 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Replitrons: A major group of eukaryotic transposons encoding HUH endonuclease.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  20. Transposable Elements Co-Option in Genome Evolution and Gene Regulation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Review

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Benoît PiéguUMR INRA-CNRS 7247, PRC, Centre INRA de Nouzilly, 37380 Nouzilly, France.
Solenne BireUMR INRA-CNRS 7247, PRC, Centre INRA de Nouzilly, 37380 Nouzilly, France; Institute of Biotechnology, University of Lausanne, Center for Biotechnology UNIL-EPFL, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Peter ArensburgerUMR INRA-CNRS 7247, PRC, Centre INRA de Nouzilly, 37380 Nouzilly, France; Biological Sciences Department, California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, CA 91768, United States. Electronic address: parensburger@csupomona.edu.
Yves BigotUMR INRA-CNRS 7247, PRC, Centre INRA de Nouzilly, 37380 Nouzilly, France. Electronic address: yves.bigot@tours.inra.fr.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRCalifornia State Polytechnic University · USUniversity of Lausanne · CH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increase of publicly available sequencing data has allowed for rapid progress in our understanding of genome composition. As new information becomes available we should constantly be updating and reanalyzing existing and newly acquired data. In this report we focus on transposable elements (TEs) which make up a significant portion of nearly all sequenced genomes. Our ability to accurately identify and classify these sequences is critical to understanding their impact on host genomes. At the same time, as we demonstrate in this report, problems with existing classification schemes have led to significant misunderstandings of the evolution of both TE sequences and their host genomes. In a pioneering publication Finnegan (1989) proposed classifying all TE sequences into two classes based on transposition mechanisms and structural features: the retrotransposons (class I) and the DNA transposons (class II). We have retraced how ideas regarding TE classification and annotation in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic scientific communities have changed over time. This has led us to observe that: (1) a number of TEs have convergent structural features and/or transposition mechanisms that have led to misleading conclusions regarding their classification, (2) the evolution of TEs is similar to that of viruses by having several unrelated origins, (3) there might be at least 8 classes and 12 orders of TEs including 10 novel orders. In an effort to address these classification issues we propose: (1) the outline of a universal TE classification, (2) a set of methods and classification rules that could be used by all scientific communities involved in the study of TEs, and (3) a 5-year schedule for the establishment of an International Committee for Taxonomy of Transposable Elements (ICTTE).

Indexed as

ClassificationBase SequenceDNA Transposable ElementsEvolution, MolecularInteinsIntronsRetroelementsSequence Analysis, DNATerminology as TopicDNA Transposable ElementsRetroelementsHost rangeMobilityNucleaseRecombinaseRibozymeTransposon

Identifiers

PMID25797922
OpenAlexW1980369994

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.