ArticleScientific reports2016
Evolutionary Footprints of Short Tandem Repeats in Avian Promoters.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genome-wide in silico characterization, validation, and cross-species transferability of microsatellite markers in Mallard and Muscovy ducks.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2023Article
- Global abundance of short tandem repeats is non-random in rodents and primates.BMC genomic data · 2022Article
- Tandem repeats ubiquitously flank and contribute to translation initiation sites.BMC genomic data · 2022Article
- Regulatory Architecture of the Neuronal Cacng2/Tarpγ2 Gene Promoter: Multiple Repressive Domains, a Polymorphic Regulatory Short Tandem Repeat, and Bidirectional Organization with Co-regulated lncRNAs.Journal of molecular neuroscience : MN · 2019Article
- Link between short tandem repeats and translation initiation site selection.Human genomics · 2018Article
- Tandem repeats mediating genetic plasticity in health and disease.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2018Review
- Genome-scale portrait and evolutionary significance of human-specific core promoter tri- and tetranucleotide short tandem repeats.Human genomics · 2018Article
- Secondary structure forming sequences drive SD-MMEJ repair of DNA double-strand breaks.Nucleic acids research · 2017Article
- The human RIT2 core promoter short tandem repeat predominant allele is species-specific in length: a selective advantage for human evolution?Molecular genetics and genomics : MGG · 2017Article
- Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Short tandem repeats (STRs) or microsatellites are well-known sequence elements that may change the spacing between transcription factor binding sites (TFBSs) in promoter regions by expansion or contraction of repetitive units. Some of these mutations have the potential to contribute to phenotypic diversity by altering patterns of gene expression. To explore how repetitive sequence motifs within promoters have evolved in avian lineages under mutation-selection balance, more than 400 evolutionary conserved STRs (ecSTRs) were identified in this study by comparing the 2 kb upstream promoter sequences of chicken against those of other birds (turkey, duck, zebra finch, and flycatcher). The rate of conservation was significantly higher in AG dinucleotide repeats than in AC or AT repeats, with the expansion of AG motifs being noticeably constrained in passerines. Analysis of the relative distance between ecSTRs and TFBSs revealed a significantly higher rate of conserved TFBSs in the vicinity of ecSTRs in both chicken-duck and chicken-passerine comparisons. Our comparative study provides a novel insight into which intrinsic factors have influenced the degree of constraint on repeat expansion/contraction during avian promoter 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.