ArticlePloS one2016
Cross-Species Analysis of Gene Expression and Function in Prefrontal Cortex, Hippocampus and Striatum.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- WIF-1 contributes to lupus-induced neuropsychological deficits via the CRYAB/STAT4-SHH axis.Arthritis research & therapy · 2024Article
- Large-scale coupling of prefrontal activity patterns as a mechanism for cognitive control in health and disease: evidence from rodent models.Frontiers in neural circuits · 2024Review
- Reveal key genes and factors affecting athletes performance in endurance sports using bioinformatic technologies.BMC genomic data · 2023Article
- Racing and Pacing in the Reward System: A Multi-Clock Circadian Control Over Dopaminergic Signalling.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Article
- Annotation depth confounds direct comparison of gene expression across species.BMC bioinformatics · 2021Article
- Bipartite tight spectral clustering (BiTSC) algorithm for identifying conserved gene co-clusters in two species.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Capability of physically reasonable OCT-based differentiation between intact brain tissues, human brain gliomas of different WHO grades, and glioma model 101.8 from rats.Biomedical optics express · 2020Article
- Evolutionary-driven C-MYC gene expression in mammalian fibroblasts.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- The use of nonhuman primates in studies of noise injury and treatment.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019Review
- Isolation and culture of porcine primary fetal progenitors and neurons from the developing dorsal telencephalon.Journal of veterinary science · 2019Article
- Predicted molecular targets and pathways for germacrone, curdione, and furanodiene in the treatment of breast cancer using a bioinformatics approach.Scientific reports · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMouse has been extensively used as a tool for investigating the onset and development of human neurological disorders. As a first step to construct a transgenic mouse model of human brain lesions, it is of fundamental importance to clarify the similarity and divergence of genetic background between non-diseased human and mouse brain tissues.
methodsWe systematically compared, based on large scale integrated microarray data, the transcriptomes of three anatomically distinct brain regions; prefrontal cortex (PFC), hippocampus (HIP) and striatum (STR), across human and mouse. The widely used DAVID web server was used to decipher the biological functions of the highly expressed genes that were identified using a previously reported approach. Venn analysis was used to depict the overlapping ratios of the notably enriched biological process (BP) terms (one-tailed Fisher's exact test and Benjamini correction; adjusted p < 0.01) between two brain tissues. GOSemSim, an R package, was selected to perform GO semantic similarity analysis. Next, we adjusted signal intensities of orthologous genes by the total signals in all samples within species, and used one minus Pearson's correlation coefficient to assess the expression distance. Hierarchical clustering and principal component analysis (PCA) were selected for expression pattern analysis. Lineage specific expressed orthologous genes were identified by comparison of the most extreme sub-datasets across species and further verified using reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) and quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR).
resultsWe found that the number of the significantly enriched BP terms of the highly expressed genes in human brain regions is larger than that in mouse corresponding brain regions. The mainly involved BP terms in human brain tissues associated with protein-membrane targeting and selenium metabolism are species-specific. The overlapping ratios of all the significantly enriched BP terms between any two brain tissues across species are lower than that within species, but the pairwise semantic similarities are very high between any two brain tissues from either human or mouse. Hierarchical clustering analysis shows the biological functions of the highly expressed genes in brain tissues are more consistent within species than interspecies; whereas it shows the expression patterns of orthologous genes are evidently conserved between human and mouse equivalent brain tissues. In addition, we identified four orthologous genes (COX5B, WIF1, SLC4A10 and PLA2G7) that are species-specific, which have been widely studied and confirmed to be closely linked with neuro- physiological and pathological functions.
conclusionOur study highlights the similarities and divergences in gene function and expression between human and mouse corresponding brain regions, including PFC, HIP and STR.
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.