ArticleScientific reports2016
Putative extremely high rate of proteome innovation in lancelets might be explained by high rate of gene prediction errors.
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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quest for Orthologs in the era of Data Deluge and AI: Challenges and Innovations in Orthology Prediction and Data Integration.Journal of molecular evolution · 2025Review
- Integrative Multi-Omics Characterization and Structural Insights into the Poorly Annotated IntegrinGenes · 2025Article
- Annotation matters: the effect of structural gene annotation on orthology inference.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2025Article
- Real or fake? Measuring the impact of protein annotation errors on estimates of domain gain and loss events.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2023Article
- Uncovering DNA-PKcs ancient phylogeny, unique sequence motifs and insights for human disease.Progress in biophysics and molecular biology · 2021Article
- Repertoire-wide gene structure analyses: a case study comparing automatically predicted and manually annotated gene models.BMC genomics · 2019Article
- Article
- The role of transposable elements in functional evolution of amphioxus genome: the case of opsin gene family.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Characterization of the TLR Family inFrontiers in immunology · 2018Article
- Similar Ratios of Introns to Intergenic Sequence across Animal Genomes.Genome biology and evolution · 2017Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A recent analysis of the genomes of Chinese and Florida lancelets has concluded that the rate of creation of novel protein domain combinations is orders of magnitude greater in lancelets than in other metazoa and it was suggested that continuous activity of transposable elements in lancelets is responsible for this increased rate of protein innovation. Since morphologically Chinese and Florida lancelets are highly conserved, this finding would contradict the observation that high rates of protein innovation are usually associated with major evolutionary innovations. Here we show that the conclusion that the rate of proteome innovation is exceptionally high in lancelets may be unjustified: the differences observed in domain architectures of orthologous proteins of different amphioxus species probably reflect high rates of gene prediction errors rather than true innovation.
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.