Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28855414›Full record

ArticleBiology letters2017

Nuclear and mitochondrial RNA editing systems have opposite effects on protein diversity.

Daniel B Sloan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biology letters, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genetic diversity ofFrontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
  5. Human Mitochondrial RNA Processing and Modifications: Overview.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
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

1 author.

Daniel B SloanDepartment of Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523, USA dbsloan@rams.colostate.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3618-0897

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RNA editing can yield protein products that differ from those directly encoded by genomic DNA. This process is pervasive in the mitochondria of many eukaryotes, where it predominantly results in the restoration of ancestral protein sequences. Nuclear mRNAs in metazoans also undergo editing (adenosine-to-inosine or 'A-to-I' substitutions), and most of these edits appear to be nonadaptive 'misfirings' of adenosine deaminases. However, recent analysis of cephalopod transcriptomes found that many editing sites are shared by anciently divergent lineages within this group, suggesting they play some adaptive role. Recent discoveries have also revealed that some fungi have an independently evolved A-to-I editing mechanism, resulting in extensive recoding of their nuclear mRNAs. Here, phylogenetic comparisons were used to determine whether RNA editing generally restores ancestral protein sequences or creates derived variants. Unlike in mitochondrial systems, RNA editing in metazoan and fungal nuclear transcripts overwhelmingly leads to novel sequences not found in inferred ancestral proteins. Even for the subset of RNA editing sites shared by deeply divergent cephalopod lineages, the primary effect of nuclear editing is an increase-not a decrease-in protein divergence. These findings suggest fundamental differences in the forces responsible for the evolution of RNA editing in nuclear versus mitochondrial systems.

Indexed as

RNA EditingBase SequenceInosinePhylogenyProteinsRNARNA, MitochondrialInosineProteinsRNARNA, MitochondrialADARamino acid substitutionsA-to-I RNA editingconstructive neutral evolutionproteome diversity

Identifiers

PMID28855414
PMCPMC5582110

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.