ArticleBMC genomics2017
Transcriptome analysis of smut fungi reveals widespread intergenic transcription and conserved antisense transcript expression.
Article in BMC genomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metabolomic Study in Ustilaginaceae with GC-MS/MS.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Identification and Functions of lncRNAs in Fungi.Non-coding RNA · 2025Review
- Characterization of RNA Helicase Genes inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Annotation and functional prediction of RNA helicases inIMA fungus · 2025Review
- Global Gene Expression of Post-Senescent Telomerase-NegativeJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Article
- New insights into genome annotation in Podospora anserina through re-exploiting multiple RNA-seq data.BMC genomics · 2022Article
- Genome-wide profiling of long non-coding RNA of the rice blast fungus Magnaporthe oryzae during infection.BMC genomics · 2022Article
- Article
- RNA Sequencing Reveals Widespread Transcription of Natural Antisense RNAs inMicroorganisms · 2022Article
- lncRsp1, a long noncoding RNA, influences Fgsp1 expression and sexual reproduction in Fusarium graminearum.Molecular plant pathology · 2022Article
- Alternative splicing diversifies the transcriptome and proteome of the rice blast fungus during host infection.RNA biology · 2022Article
- Advances in Non-Coding RNA Sequencing.Non-coding RNA · 2021Review
- Fungal Pathogen Emergence: Investigations with anJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Transcriptome-wide expression profiling ofMicrobial genomics · 2020Article
- Genome-wide evolution of wobble base-pairing nucleotides of branchpoint motifs with increasing organismal complexity.RNA biology · 2020Article
- GC-MS-Based Metabolomics for the Smut FungusFrontiers in molecular biosciences · 2020Article
- Genome-wide identification of long non-coding RNAs suggests a potential association with effector gene transcription in Phytophthora sojae.Molecular plant pathology · 2018Article
- Transcripts and tumors: regulatory and metabolic programming during biotrophic phytopathogenesis.F1000Research · 2018Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundBiotrophic fungal plant pathogens cause billions of dollars in losses to North American crops annually. The model for functional investigation of these fungi is Ustilago maydis. Its 20.5 Mb annotated genome sequence has been an excellent resource for investigating biotrophic plant pathogenesis. Expressed-sequence tag libraries and microarray hybridizations have provided insight regarding the type of transcripts produced by U. maydis but these analyses were not comprehensive and there were insufficient data for transcriptome comparison to other smut fungi. To improve transcriptome annotation and enable comparative analyses, comprehensive strand-specific RNA-seq was performed on cell-types of three related smut species: U. maydis (common smut of corn), Ustilago hordei (covered smut of barley), and Sporisorium reilianum (head smut of corn).
resultsIn total, >1 billion paired-end sequence reads were obtained from haploid cell, dikaryon and teliospore RNA of U. maydis, haploid cell RNA of U. hordei, and haploid and dikaryon cell RNA of S. reilianum. The sequences were assembled into transfrags using Trinity, and updated gene models were created using PASA and categorized with Cufflinks Cuffcompare. Representative genes that were predicted for the first time with these RNA-seq analyses and genes with novel annotation features were independently assessed by reverse transcriptase PCR. The analyses indicate hundreds more predicted proteins, relative to the previous genome annotation, could be produced by U. maydis from altered transcript forms, and that the number of non-coding RNAs produced, including transcribed intergenic sequences and natural antisense transcripts, approximately equals the number of mRNAs. This high representation of non-coding RNAs appears to be a conserved feature of the smut fungi regardless of whether they have RNA interference machinery. Approximately 50% of the identified NATs were conserved among the smut fungi.
conclusionsOverall, these analyses revealed: 1) smut genomes encode a number of transcriptional units that is twice the number of annotated protein-coding genes, 2) a small number of intergenic transcripts may encode proteins with characteristics of fungal effectors, 3) the vast majority of intergenic and antisense transcripts do not contain ORFs, 4) a large proportion of the identified antisense transcripts were detected at orthologous loci among the smut fungi, and 5) there is an enrichment of functional categories among orthologous loci that suggests antisense RNAs could have a genome-wide, non-RNAi-mediated, influence on gene expression in smut fungi.
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.