ArticleBMC genomics2026
Coding regions are rarely predefined in the eukaryotic genomes: a note on simplified models of gene architecture.
Article in BMC genomics, 2026. 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe pedagogical depiction of eukaryotic gene structure seems to assume that coding sequences (CDSs) are predefined in the genome, with transcript diversity arising mainly from exon shuffling. However, whether such "predefined CDS" model is universal remains untested.
methodsWe systematically analyzed seven representative eukaryotic genomes to classify protein-coding genes (PCGs) into four classes based on the positional consistency of CDS start/stop sites. Both strict and loose criteria were applied, followed by cross-species comparisons of genomic feature and functional enrichment.
resultsPredefined CDS genes (Class 1) were unexpectedly rare, comprising < 10% of PCGs in most species but exceeding 25% in Drosophila. Class 1 genes displayed more exons, longer CDSs, but minimal splicing isoforms, indicating purifying selection on molecular diversity. Class 1 genes are enriched in housekeeping terms like neuronal and developmental processes, whereas highly variable Class 4 genes (with distinct CDS start/end positions across different transcripts) are associated with fast-evolving processes like metabolism and reproduction.
conclusionsIn contrast to the pedagogical simplification, our results show that CDSs are rarely predefined in the genome. The differential roles of predefined versus variable CDS architectures may reflect how natural selection balances molecular stability and functional innovation.
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.