Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39217658›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in genetics & development2024

Massively parallel approaches for characterizing noncoding functional variation in human evolution.

Stephen Rong, Elise Root, Steven K Reilly

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in genetics & development, 2024. 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
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Stephen RongDepartment of Genetics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA. Electronic address: stephen.rong@yale.edu.
Elise RootDepartment of Genetics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA.
Steven K ReillyDepartment of Genetics, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA; Wu Tsai Institute, Yale University, New Haven, CT, USA. Electronic address: steven.k.reilly@yale.edu.

Funding

Multi-scale functional dissection and modeling of regulatory variation associated with human traitsR01HG012872 · NHGRI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI Steven K. Reilly · 2023 to 2026
$3.1M
Comprehensive Characterization of Adaptive Regulatory Variation Linked to Human DiseaseR00HG010669 · NHGRI · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI REILLY, STEVEN K. · 2021 to 2023
$737k
NHGRI NIH HHS R00 HG010669NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG012872
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The genetic differences underlying unique phenotypes in humans compared to our closest primate relatives have long remained a mystery. Similarly, the genetic basis of adaptations between human groups during our expansion across the globe is poorly characterized. Uncovering the downstream phenotypic consequences of these genetic variants has been difficult, as a substantial portion lies in noncoding regions, such as cis-regulatory elements (CREs). Here, we review recent high-throughput approaches to measure the functions of CREs and the impact of variation within them. CRISPR screens can directly perturb CREs in the genome to understand downstream impacts on gene expression and phenotypes, while massively parallel reporter assays can decipher the regulatory impact of sequence variants. Machine learning has begun to be able to predict regulatory function from sequence alone, further scaling our ability to characterize genome function. Applying these tools across diverse phenotypes, model systems, and ancestries is beginning to revolutionize our understanding of noncoding variation underlying human evolution.

Indexed as

Evolution, MolecularGenome, HumanAnimalsGenetic VariationHumansMachine LearningPhenotypeRegulatory Sequences, Nucleic Acid

Identifiers

PMID39217658
PMCPMC11648527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.