ArticlePloS one2015
DNA template dependent accuracy variation of nucleotide selection in transcription.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Viral T7 RNA Polymerase Ratcheting Along DNA With Fidelity Control.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2019Review
- Transcriptional accuracy modeling suggests two-step proofreading by RNA polymerase.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- Proofreading neutralizes potential error hotspots in genetic code translation by transfer RNAs.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2016Article
- Accuracy of initial codon selection by aminoacyl-tRNAs on the mRNA-programmed bacterial ribosome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
It has been commonly assumed that the effect of erroneous transcription of DNA genes into messenger RNAs on peptide sequence errors are masked by much more frequent errors of mRNA translation to protein. We present a theoretical model of transcriptional accuracy. It uses experimentally estimated standard free energies of double-stranded DNA and RNA/DNA hybrids and predicts a DNA template dependent transcriptional accuracy variation spanning several orders of magnitude. The model also identifies high-error as well a high-accuracy transcription motifs. The source of the large accuracy span is the context dependent variation of the stacking free energy of pairs of correct and incorrect base pairs in the ever moving transcription bubble. Our model predictions have direct experimental support from recent single molecule based identifications of transcriptional errors in the C. elegans transcriptome. Our conclusions challenge the general view that amino acid substitution errors in proteins are mainly caused by translational errors. It suggests instead that transcriptional error hotspots are the dominating source of peptide sequence errors in some DNA template contexts, while mRNA translation is the major cause of protein errors in other contexts.
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.