Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33409542›Full record

ArticleJournal of molecular evolution2021

Crick Wobble and Superwobble in Standard Genetic Code Evolution.

Michael Yarus

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of molecular evolution, 2021. 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
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Genes · 2023
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Fitting the standard genetic code into its triplet table.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Evolution of the genetic code.Transcription · 2021
    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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael YarusDepartment of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309-0347, USA. yarus@colorado.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-0295-9795
University of Colorado Boulder · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Wobble coding is inevitable during evolution of the Standard Genetic Code (SGC). It ultimately splits half of NN U/C/A/G coding boxes with different assignments. Further, it contributes to pervasive SGC order by reinforcing close spacing for identical SGC assignments. But wobble cannot appear too soon, or it will inhibit encoding and more decisively, obstruct evolution of full coding tables. However, these prior results assumed Crick wobble, NN U/C and NN A/G, read by a single adaptor RNA. Superwobble translates NN U/C/A/G codons, using one adaptor RNA with an unmodified 5' anticodon U (appropriate to earliest coding) in modern mitochondria, plastids, and mycoplasma. Assuming the SGC was selected when evolving codes most resembled it, characteristics of the critical selection events can be calculated. For example, continuous superwobble infrequently evolves SGC-like coding tables. So, continuous superwobble is a very improbable origin hypothesis. In contrast, late-arising superwobble shares late Crick wobble's frequent resemblance to SGC order. Thus late superwobble is possible, but yields SGC-like assignments less frequently than late Crick wobble. Ancient coding ambiguity, most simply, arose from Crick wobble alone. This is consistent with SGC assignments to NAN codons.

Indexed as

AnticodonGenetic CodeCodonEvolution, MolecularRNAAnticodonCodonRNAAnticodonCodingCodonSuperwobbleTriplet

Identifiers

PMID33409542
PMCPMC7884361
OpenAlexW3120660440

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.