ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2016
Disentangling Sources of Selection on Exonic Transcriptional Enhancers.
Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2016. 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.
- Functional synonymous mutations and their evolutionary consequences.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025Review
- Uncovering cell-type-specific immunomodulatory variants and molecular phenotypes in COVID-19 using structurally resolved protein networks.Cell reports · 2024Article
- Enhancer grammar in development, evolution, and disease: dependencies and interplay.Developmental cell · 2021Review
- Exonic splice regulation imposes strong selection at synonymous sites.Genome research · 2018Article
- Adenine Enrichment at the Fourth CDS Residue in Bacterial Genes Is Consistent with Error Proofing for +1 Frameshifts.Molecular biology and evolution · 2017Article
- Estimating the prevalence of functional exonic splice regulatory information.Human genetics · 2017Review
- Both Maintenance and Avoidance of RNA-Binding Protein Interactions Constrain Coding Sequence Evolution.Molecular biology and evolution · 2017Article
- Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
In addition to coding for proteins, exons can also impact transcription by encoding regulatory elements such as enhancers. It has been debated whether such features confer heightened selective constraint, or evolve neutrally. We have addressed this question by developing a new approach to disentangle the sources of selection acting on exonic enhancers, in which we model the evolutionary rates of every possible substitution as a function of their effects on both protein sequence and enhancer activity. In three exonic enhancers, we found no significant association between evolutionary rates and effects on enhancer activity. This suggests that despite having biochemical activity, these exonic enhancers have no detectable selective constraint, and thus are unlikely to play a major role in protein evolution.
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.