ArticleScientific reports2016
Purifying selection shapes the coincident SNP distribution of primate coding sequences.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A-to-I RNA editing contributes to the persistence of predicted damaging mutations in populations.Genome research · 2019Article
- An Evolutionary Landscape of A-to-I RNA Editome across Metazoan Species.Genome biology and evolution · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome-wide analysis has observed an excess of coincident single nucleotide polymorphisms (coSNPs) at human-chimpanzee orthologous positions, and suggested that this is due to cryptic variation in the mutation rate. While this phenomenon primarily corresponds with non-coding coSNPs, the situation in coding sequences remains unclear. Here we calculate the observed-to-expected ratio of coSNPs (coSNPO/E) to estimate the prevalence of human-chimpanzee coSNPs, and show that the excess of coSNPs is also present in coding regions. Intriguingly, coSNPO/E is much higher at zero-fold than at nonzero-fold degenerate sites; such a difference is due to an elevation of coSNPO/E at zero-fold degenerate sites, rather than a reduction at nonzero-fold degenerate ones. These trends are independent of chimpanzee subpopulation, population size, or sequencing techniques; and hold in broad generality across primates. We find that this discrepancy cannot fully explained by sequence contexts, shared ancestral polymorphisms, SNP density, and recombination rate, and that coSNPO/E in coding sequences is significantly influenced by purifying selection. We also show that selection and mutation rate affect coSNPO/E independently, and coSNPs tend to be less damaging and more correlated with human diseases than non-coSNPs. These suggest that coSNPs may represent a "signature" during primate 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.