Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26728716›Full record

ArticleGenome research2016

The life history of retrocopies illuminates the evolution of new mammalian genes.

Francesco Nicola Carelli, Takashi Hayakawa, Yasuhiro Go, Hiroo Imai, Maria Warnefors, Henrik Kaessmann

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 87 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
87citing 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

87 citing papers in PubMed, 154 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. TheInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Compensation of gene dosage on the mammalian X.Development (Cambridge, England) · 2024
    Review
  20. Review

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

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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Francesco Nicola CarelliCenter for Integrative Genomics, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Takashi HayakawaDepartment of Wildlife Science (Nagoya Railroad Company, Limited), Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University, Inuyama, Aichi 484-8506, Japan; Japan Monkey Center, Inuyama, Aichi 484-0081, Japan;
Yasuhiro GoDepartment of Brain Sciences, Center for Novel Science Initiatives, National Institutes of Natural Sciences, Okazaki, Aichi 444-8585, Japan; Department of Developmental Physiology, National Institute for Physiological Sciences, Okazaki, Aichi 444-8585, Japan; Department of Physiological Sciences, School of Life Science, SOKENDAI (The Graduate University for Advanced Studies), Okazaki, Aichi 484-8585, Japan;
Hiroo ImaiDepartment of Cellular and Molecular Biology, Primate Research Institute, Kyoto University, Inuyama, Aichi 484-8506, Japan.
Maria WarneforsCenter for Integrative Genomics, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
Henrik KaessmannCenter for Integrative Genomics, University of Lausanne, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland; Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics, 1015 Lausanne, Switzerland;
SIB Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics · CHKyoto University · JPNational Institutes of Natural Sciences · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New genes contribute substantially to adaptive evolutionary innovation, but the functional evolution of new mammalian genes has been little explored at a broad scale. Previous work established mRNA-derived gene duplicates, known as retrocopies, as models for the study of new gene origination. Here we combine mammalian transcriptomic and epigenomic data to unveil the processes underlying the evolution of stripped-down retrocopies into complex new genes. We show that although some robustly expressed retrocopies are transcribed from preexisting promoters, most evolved new promoters from scratch or recruited proto-promoters in their genomic vicinity. In particular, many retrocopy promoters emerged from ancestral enhancers (or bivalent regulatory elements) or are located in CpG islands not associated with other genes. We detected 88-280 selectively preserved retrocopies per mammalian species, illustrating that these mechanisms facilitated the birth of many functional retrogenes during mammalian evolution. The regulatory evolution of originally monoexonic retrocopies was frequently accompanied by exon gain, which facilitated co-option of distant promoters and allowed expression of alternative isoforms. While young retrogenes are often initially expressed in the testis, increased regulatory and structural complexities allowed retrogenes to functionally diversify and evolve somatic organ functions, sometimes as complex as those of their parents. Thus, some retrogenes evolved the capacity to temporarily substitute for their parents during the process of male meiotic X inactivation, while others rendered parental functions superfluous, allowing for parental gene loss. Overall, our reconstruction of the "life history" of mammalian retrogenes highlights retroposition as a general model for understanding new gene birth and functional evolution.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularRetroelementsAnimalsComputational BiologyEpigenesis, GeneticGene Expression ProfilingGenesHumansMammalsMolecular Sequence AnnotationPhylogenyPromoter Regions, GeneticRegulatory Sequences, Nucleic AcidTranscriptomeVertebratesRetroelements

Identifiers

PMID26728716
PMCPMC4772013
OpenAlexW2263703262

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.