ArticleBMC genomics2023
Estimating transcriptome complexities across eukaryotes.
Article in BMC genomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Selecting methods for draft GEM generation in multicellular eukaryotes: a comparative analysis.BMC bioinformatics · 2026Article
- Analysis of Transcript Expression and Core Promoter DNA Sequences of Brain, Adipose Tissues and Testis in Human and Fruit Fly.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Phylogenetic Analysis of 590 Species Reveals Distinct Evolutionary Patterns of Intron-Exon Gene Structures Across Eukaryotic Lineages.Molecular biology and evolution · 2024Article
- Cell-type specific and differential expression of LINC-RSAS long noncoding RNA declines in the testes during ageing of the rat.Biogerontology · 2024Article
- Nucleotide-level distance metrics to quantify alternative splicing implemented in TranD.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- Re-evaluating evidence for giant genomes in amoebae.Genetics and molecular biology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenomic complexity is a growing field of evolution, with case studies for comparative evolutionary analyses in model and emerging non-model systems. Understanding complexity and the functional components of the genome is an untapped wealth of knowledge ripe for exploration. With the "remarkable lack of correspondence" between genome size and complexity, there needs to be a way to quantify complexity across organisms. In this study, we use a set of complexity metrics that allow for evaluating changes in complexity using TranD.
resultsWe ascertain if complexity is increasing or decreasing across transcriptomes and at what structural level, as complexity varies. In this study, we define three metrics - TpG, EpT, and EpG- to quantify the transcriptome's complexity that encapsulates the dynamics of alternative splicing. Here we compare complexity metrics across 1) whole genome annotations, 2) a filtered subset of orthologs, and 3) novel genes to elucidate the impacts of orthologs and novel genes in transcript model analysis. Effective Exon Number (EEN) issued to compare the distribution of exon sizes within transcripts against random expectations of uniform exon placement. EEN accounts for differences in exon size, which is important because novel gene differences in complexity for orthologs and whole-transcriptome analyses are biased towards low-complexity genes with few exons and few alternative transcripts.
conclusionsWith our metric analyses, we are able to quantify changes in complexity across diverse lineages with greater precision and accuracy than previous cross-species comparisons under ortholog conditioning. These analyses represent a step toward whole-transcriptome analysis in the emerging field of non-model evolutionary genomics, with key insights for evolutionary inference of complexity changes on deep timescales across the tree of life. We suggest a means to quantify biases generated in ortholog calling and correct complexity analysis for lineage-specific effects. With these metrics, we directly assay the quantitative properties of newly formed lineage-specific genes as they lower complexity.
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.