ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
A Narrow Range of Transcript-error Rates Across the Tree of Life.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The expression of genomically-encoded information is not error-free. Transcript-error rates are dramatically higher than DNA-level mutation rates, and despite their transient nature, the steady-state load of such errors must impose some burden on cellular performance. However, a broad perspective on the degree to which transcript-error rates are constrained by natural selection and diverge among lineages remains to be developed. Here, we present a genome-wide analysis of transcript-error rates across the Tree of Life using a modified rolling-circle sequencing method, revealing that the range in error rates is remarkably narrow across diverse species. Transcript errors tend to be randomly distributed, with little evidence supporting local control of error rates associated with gene-expression levels. A majority of transcript errors result in missense errors if translated, and as with a fraction of nonsense transcript errors, these are underrepresented relative to random expectations, suggesting the existence of mechanisms for purging some such errors. To quantitatively understand how natural selection and random genetic drift might shape transcript-error rates across species, we present a model based on cell biology and population genetics, incorporating information on cell volume, proteome size, average degree of exposure of individual errors, and effective population size. However, while this model provides a framework for understanding the evolution of this highly conserved trait, as currently structured it explains only 20% of the variation in the data, suggesting a need for further theoretical work in this area.
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.