ArticlePloS one2015
Neurodevelopmental LincRNA Microsyteny Conservation and Mammalian Brain Size Evolution.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Brain Long Noncoding RNAs: Multitask Regulators of Neuronal Differentiation and Function.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- A novel lincRNA identified in buffalo oocytes with protein binding characteristics could hold the key for oocyte competence.Molecular biology reports · 2021Article
- The functions of long non-coding RNAs in neural stem cell proliferation and differentiation.Cell & bioscience · 2020Review
- Evolution of the Chordate Telencephalon.Current biology : CB · 2019Review
- Deconstructing cortical folding: genetic, cellular and mechanical determinants.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2019Review
- Inferring Evolutionary Process From Neuroanatomical Data.Frontiers in neuroanatomy · 2018Review
- Understanding the Role of lncRNAs in Nervous System Development.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2017Review
- Single-cell analysis of long non-coding RNAs in the developing human neocortex.Genome biology · 2016Article
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
The mammalian neocortex has undergone repeated selection for increases and decreases in size and complexity, often over relatively short evolutionary time. But because probing developmental mechanisms across many species is experimentally unfeasible, it is unknown whether convergent morphologies in distantly related species are regulated by conserved developmental programs. In this work, we have taken advantage of the abundance of available mammalian genomes to find evidence of selection on genomic regions putatively regulating neurogenesis in large- versus small-brained species. Using published fetal human RNA-seq data, we show that the gene-neighborhood (i.e., microsynteny) of long intergenic non-coding RNAs (lincRNAs) implicated in cortical development is differentially conserved in large-brained species, lending support to the hypothesis that lincRNAs regulating neurogenesis are selectively lost in small-brained species. We provide evidence that this is not a phenomenon attributable to lincRNA expressed in all tissue types and is therefore likely to represent an adaptive function in the evolution of neurogenesis. A strong correlation between transcription factor-adjacency and lincRNA sequence conservation reinforces this conclusion.
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.