ArticleNature communications2019
The preponderance of nonsynonymous A-to-I RNA editing in coleoids is nonadaptive.
Article in Nature communications, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 35 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
35 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the adaptive hypothesis of A-to-I RNA editing in filamentous ascomycete fungi.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026Article
- Adaptive Spo11 RNA editing gate optimizes meiosis I pace and mitotic proliferation while preserving ascospore formation.Science advances · 2026Article
- RNA editing system: Balancing altruistic antiviral defense and fitness trade-offs in fungi.mLife · 2025Article
- High Conservation of Translation-Enabling RNA Editing Sites in Hyper-editing Ferns Implies They Are Not Selectively Neutral.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- On the origin, evolution, and maintenance of RNA editing.Nucleic acids research · 2025Review
- Unraveling ADAR-Mediated Protein Recoding: A Proteogenomic Exploration in Model Organisms and Human Pathology.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- An Ultimate Question for Functional A-to-I mRNA Editing: Why Not a Genomic G?Journal of molecular evolution · 2025Review
- Narrowing down the candidates of beneficial A-to-I RNA editing by comparing the recoding sites with uneditable counterparts.Nucleus (Austin, Tex.) · 2024Article
- Comparative genomic analyses reveal evidence for adaptive A-to-I RNA editing in insectEpigenetics · 2024Article
- A comprehensive atlas of pig RNA editome across 23 tissues reveals RNA editing affecting interaction mRNA-miRNAs.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2024Article
- Learning from the Codon Table: Convergent Recoding Provides Novel Understanding on the Evolution of A-to-I RNA Editing.Journal of molecular evolution · 2024Article
- Genetic and selective constraints on the optimization of gene product diversity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Adaptive advantages of restorative RNA editing in fungi for resolving survival-reproduction trade-offs.Science advances · 2024Article
- Article
- Autorecoding A-to-I RNA editing sites in theRNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- Differential adaptive RNA editing signals between insects and plants revealed by a new measurement termed haplotype diversity.Biology direct · 2023Article
- Article
- Lactobacillus for ribosome peptide editing cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2023Review
- Experimental evidence for the functional importance and adaptive advantage of A-to-I RNA editing in fungi.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023Article
- Chloroplast C-to-U RNA editing in vascular plants is adaptive due to its restorative effect: testing the restorative hypothesis.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
A-to-I editing enzymatically converts the base adenosine (A) in RNA molecules to inosine (I), which is recognized as guanine (G) in translation. Exceptionally abundant A-to-I editing was recently discovered in the neural tissues of coleoids (octopuses, squids, and cuttlefishes), with a greater fraction of nonsynonymous sites than synonymous sites subject to high levels of editing. Although this phenomenon is thought to indicate widespread adaptive editing, its potential advantage is unknown. Here we propose an alternative, nonadaptive explanation. Specifically, increasing the cellular editing activity permits some otherwise harmful G-to-A nonsynonymous substitutions, because the As are edited to Is at sufficiently high levels. These high editing levels are constrained upon substitutions, resulting in the predominance of nonsynonymous editing at highly edited sites. Our evidence for this explanation suggests that the prevalent nonsynonymous editing in coleoids is generally nonadaptive, as in species with much lower editing activities.
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.