Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27646533›Full record

ArticleGenome research2016

Translational plasticity facilitates the accumulation of nonsense genetic variants in the human population.

Sujatha Jagannathan, Robert K Bradley

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 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. A recap of RNA recapping.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. RNA · 2019
    Review
  20. Zebrafish Models of Rare Hereditary Pediatric Diseases.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018
    Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sujatha JagannathanComputational Biology Program, Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington 98109, USA.
Robert K BradleyComputational Biology Program, Public Health Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington 98109, USA.
Fred Hutch Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genetic variants that disrupt protein-coding DNA are ubiquitous in the human population, with about 100 such loss-of-function variants per individual. While most loss-of-function variants are rare, a subset have risen to high frequency and occur in a homozygous state in healthy individuals. It is unknown why these common variants are well tolerated, even though some affect essential genes implicated in Mendelian disease. Here, we combine genomic, proteomic, and biochemical data to demonstrate that many common nonsense variants do not ablate protein production from their host genes. We provide computational and experimental evidence for diverse mechanisms of gene rescue, including alternative splicing, stop codon readthrough, alternative translation initiation, and C-terminal truncation. Our results suggest a molecular explanation for the mild fitness costs of many common nonsense variants and indicate that translational plasticity plays a prominent role in shaping human genetic diversity.

Indexed as

Codon, NonsenseProtein BiosynthesisCell PlasticityCodon, TerminatorGenetic FitnessGenome, HumanGenomicsHumansLoss of Function MutationProteomicsCodon, NonsenseCodon, Terminator

Identifiers

PMID27646533
PMCPMC5131816
OpenAlexW2522592061

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.