Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29617896›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2018

An Evaluation of Function of Multicopy Noncoding RNAs in Mammals Using ENCODE/FANTOM Data and Comparative Genomics.

Marc P Hoeppner, Elena Denisenko, Paul P Gardner, Sebastian Schmeier, Anthony M Poole

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. The cellular landscape of mid-size noncoding RNA.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. RNA · 2019
    Review
  8. Role of circular RNAs in cardiovascular diseases.Experimental biology and medicine (Maywood, N.J.) · 2019
    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

5 authors.

Marc P HoeppnerInstitute of Clinical Molecular Biology, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Elena DenisenkoInstitute of Natural and Mathematical Sciences, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Paul P GardnerBiomolecular Interaction Centre, School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Sebastian SchmeierInstitute of Natural and Mathematical Sciences, Massey University, Auckland, New Zealand.
Anthony M PooleBioinformatics Institute, School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mammalian diversification has coincided with a rapid proliferation of various types of noncoding RNAs, including members of both snRNAs and snoRNAs. The significance of this expansion however remains obscure. While some ncRNA copy-number expansions have been linked to functionally tractable effects, such events may equally likely be neutral, perhaps as a result of random retrotransposition. Hindering progress in our understanding of such observations is the difficulty in establishing function for the diverse features that have been identified in our own genome. Projects such as ENCODE and FANTOM have revealed a hidden world of genomic expression patterns, as well as a host of other potential indicators of biological function. However, such projects have been criticized, particularly from practitioners in the field of molecular evolution, where many suspect these data provide limited insight into biological function. The molecular evolution community has largely taken a skeptical view, thus it is important to establish tests of function. We use a range of data, including data drawn from ENCODE and FANTOM, to examine the case for function for the recent copy number expansion in mammals of six evolutionarily ancient RNA families involved in splicing and rRNA maturation. We use several criteria to assess evidence for function: conservation of sequence and structure, genomic synteny, evidence for transposition, and evidence for species-specific expression. Applying these criteria, we find that only a minority of loci show strong evidence for function and that, for the majority, we cannot reject the null hypothesis of no function.

Indexed as

DNA Transposable ElementsGene DosageGene ExpressionRNA, Small NuclearAnimalsDatabases, GeneticEvolution, MolecularGenomicsMammalsMultigene FamilyRNA SplicingDNA Transposable ElementsRNA, Small Nuclear

Identifiers

PMID29617896
PMCPMC5967550

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.