Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31435687›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2019

Big on Change, Small on Innovation: Evolutionary Consequences of RNA Sequence Duplication.

Andrew Plebanek, Caleb Larnerd, Milena Popović, Chenyu Wei, Andrew Pohorille, Mark A Ditzler

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 44% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Coevolution of RNase P and the ribosome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. 2019 Zuckerkandl Prize.Journal of molecular evolution · 2020
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew PlebanekExobiology Branch, Space Science and Astrobiology Division, NASA Ames Research Center, Bldg N239 Mail Stop 239-4, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA.
Caleb LarnerdNASA Internship Program, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA.
Milena PopovićExobiology Branch, Space Science and Astrobiology Division, NASA Ames Research Center, Bldg N239 Mail Stop 239-4, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA.
Chenyu WeiExobiology Branch, Space Science and Astrobiology Division, NASA Ames Research Center, Bldg N239 Mail Stop 239-4, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA.
Andrew PohorilleExobiology Branch, Space Science and Astrobiology Division, NASA Ames Research Center, Bldg N239 Mail Stop 239-4, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA.
Mark A DitzlerExobiology Branch, Space Science and Astrobiology Division, NASA Ames Research Center, Bldg N239 Mail Stop 239-4, Moffett Field, CA, 94035, USA. mark.a.ditzler@nasa.gov.ORCID 0000-0003-3108-4596
Ames Research Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The potential for biopolymers to evolve new structures has important consequences for their ability to optimize function and our attempts to reconstruct their evolutionary histories. Prior work with in vitro systems suggests that structural remodeling of RNA is difficult to achieve through the accumulation of point mutations or through recombination events. Sequence duplication may represent an alternative mechanism that can more readily lead to the evolution of new structures. Structural and sequence elements in many RNAs and proteins appear to be the products of duplication events, indicating that this mechanism plays a major role in molecular evolution. Despite the potential significance of this mechanism, little experimental data is available concerning the structural and evolutionary consequences of duplicating biopolymer sequences. To assess the structural consequences of sequence duplication on the evolution of RNA, we mutagenized an RNA sequence containing two copies of an ATP aptamer and subjected the resulting population to multiple in vitro evolution experiments. We identified multiple routes by which duplication, followed by the accumulation of functional point mutations, allowed our populations to sample two entirely different secondary structures. The two structures have no base pairs in common, but both structures contain two copies of the same ATP-binding motif. We do not observe the emergence of any other functional secondary structures beyond these two. Although this result suggests a limited capacity for duplication to support short-term functional innovation, major changes in secondary structure, like the one observed here, should be given careful consideration as they are likely to frustrate attempts to infer deep evolutionary histories of functional RNAs.

Indexed as

Base SequenceGene DuplicationAptamers, NucleotideEvolution, MolecularNucleic Acid ConformationRNAAptamers, NucleotideRNAAptamerDuplicationRNAStructure

Identifiers

PMID31435687
PMCPMC6711949
OpenAlexW2969358432

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.