ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
A new comparative framework for estimating selection on synonymous substitutions.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Selection on synonymous codon usage is a well known and widespread phenomenon, yet existing models often do not account for it or its effect on synonymous substitution rates. In this article, we develop and expand the capabilities of Multiclass Synonymous Substitution (MSS) models, which account for such selection by partitioning synonymous substitutions into two or more classes and estimating a relative substitution rate for each class, while accounting for important confounders like mutation bias. We identify extensive heterogeneity among relative synonymous substitution rates in an empirical dataset of ~12,000 gene alignments from twelve
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.