ArticleGenetics2022
Reconstruction of full-length LINE-1 progenitors from ancestral genomes.
Article in Genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- The activity, divergence, and evolutionary degradation of modern-day homing endonucleases and behavior of their reconstructed ancestors.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- Comparative genomics reveals LINE-1 recombination with diverse RNAs.Cell genomics · 2026Article
- Multi-species analysis of inflammatory response elements reveals ancient and lineage-specific contributions of transposable elements to NF-kB binding.Genome research · 2025Article
- SomaticiScience · 2025Article
- Locus-level L1 DNA methylation profiling reveals the epigenetic and transcriptional interplay between L1s and their integration sites.Cell genomics · 2024Article
- Ancestral genome reconstruction enhances transposable element annotation by identifying degenerate integrants.Cell genomics · 2024Article
- Quantifying the arms race between LINE-1 and KRAB-zinc finger genes through TECookbook.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Sequences derived from the Long INterspersed Element-1 (L1) family of retrotransposons occupy at least 17% of the human genome, with 67 distinct subfamilies representing successive waves of expansion and extinction in mammalian lineages. L1s contribute extensively to gene regulation, but their molecular history is difficult to trace, because most are present only as truncated and highly mutated fossils. Consequently, L1 entries in current databases of repeat sequences are composed mainly of short diagnostic subsequences, rather than full functional progenitor sequences for each subfamily. Here, we have coupled 2 levels of sequence reconstruction (at the level of whole genomes and L1 subfamilies) to reconstruct progenitor sequences for all human L1 subfamilies that are more functionally and phylogenetically plausible than existing models. Most of the reconstructed sequences are at or near the canonical length of L1s and encode uninterrupted ORFs with expected protein domains. We also show that the presence or absence of binding sites for KRAB-C2H2 Zinc Finger Proteins, even in ancient-reconstructed progenitor L1s, mirrors binding observed in human ChIP-exo experiments, thus extending the arms race and domestication model. RepeatMasker searches of the modern human genome suggest that the new models may be able to assign subfamily resolution identities to previously ambiguous L1 instances. The reconstructed L1 sequences will be useful for genome annotation and functional study of both L1 evolution and L1 contributions to host regulatory networks.
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.