ArticleThe plant genome2025
Contrasting distributions and expression characteristics of transcribing repeats in Setaria viridis.
Article in The plant genome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assembly and characterization of the complete mitochondrial genome ofFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Contrasting distributions and expression characteristics of transcribing repeats in Setaria viridis.The plant genome · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Repetitive DNA contributes significantly to plant genome size, adaptation, and evolution. However, little is understood about the transcription of repeats. This is addressed here in the plant green foxtail millet (Setaria viridis). First, we used RepeatExplorer2 to calculate the genome proportion (GP) of all repeat types and compared the GP of long terminal repeat (LTR) retroelements against annotated complete and incomplete LTR retroelements (Ty1/copia and Ty3/gypsy) identified by DANTE in a whole genome assembly. We show that DANTE-identified LTR retroelements can comprise ∼0.75% of the inflorescence poly-A transcriptome and ∼0.24% of the stem ribo-depleted transcriptome. In the RNA libraries from inflorescence tissue, both LTR retroelements and DNA transposons identified by RepeatExplorer2 were highly abundant, where they may be taking advantage of the reduced epigenetic silencing in the germ line to amplify. Typically, there was a higher representation of DANTE-identified LTR retroelements in the transcriptome than RepeatExplorer2-identified LTR retroelements, potentially reflecting the transcription of elements that have insufficient genomic copy numbers to be detected by RepeatExplorer2. In contrast, for ribo-depleted libraries of stem tissues, the reverse was observed, with a higher transcriptome representation of RepeatExplorer2-identified LTR retroelements. For RepeatExplorer2-identified repeats, we show that the GP of most Ty1/copia and Ty3/gypsy families were positively correlated with their transcript proportion. In addition, guanine- and cytosine-rich repeats with high sequence similarity were also the most abundant in the transcriptome, and these likely represent young elements that are most capable of amplification due to their ability to evade epigenetic silencing.
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.