2007
DOI: 10.1186/gb-2007-8-6-r127
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparative analysis of transposed element insertion within human and mouse genomes reveals Alu's unique role in shaping the human transcriptome

Abstract: Transposed elements affect transcriptomes

Analysis of transposed elements in the human and mouse genomes reveals many effects on the transcriptomes, including a higher level of exonization of Alu elements than other elements.

Abstract Background: Transposed elements (TEs) have a substantial impact on mammalian evolution and are involved in numerous genetic diseases. We compared the impact of TEs on the human transcriptome and the mouse transcriptome.

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

20
292
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 207 publications
(318 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
20
292
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most of the identified TE insertions were within non-coding regions (introns and flanking sequences), and such insertions were virtually absent from the CDSs, as previously reported in Drosophila (Fontanillas et al, 2007;Kaminker et al, 2002;Miller et al, 2000), reinforcing the view that insertions in non-coding regions are tolerated, whereas TE insertions within or close to coding regions can have deleterious effects and are removed through purifying selection (Lipatov et al, 2005;Sela et al, 2007;Yang and Barbash, 2008). Considering all of the genes in each category studied here, the highest percentage of genes harboring TEs in their flanking regions were found among Cyps associated with insecticide resistance and their neighboring non-Cyp genes in both D. melanogaster and D. simulans.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 67%
“…Most of the identified TE insertions were within non-coding regions (introns and flanking sequences), and such insertions were virtually absent from the CDSs, as previously reported in Drosophila (Fontanillas et al, 2007;Kaminker et al, 2002;Miller et al, 2000), reinforcing the view that insertions in non-coding regions are tolerated, whereas TE insertions within or close to coding regions can have deleterious effects and are removed through purifying selection (Lipatov et al, 2005;Sela et al, 2007;Yang and Barbash, 2008). Considering all of the genes in each category studied here, the highest percentage of genes harboring TEs in their flanking regions were found among Cyps associated with insecticide resistance and their neighboring non-Cyp genes in both D. melanogaster and D. simulans.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 67%
“…The preferential insertion of SINEs into introns, rather than exons, reflects selection against the deleterious effects of SINE insertions in protein-coding regions [43]. There are numerous examples of disease-causing SINE insertions in exons [44 -46].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Yet, retrotransposons contain promoters and enhancers (1) and can serve relevant host function in promoting mRNA synthesis of the immediately downstream host genes (6,7). The majority of retrotransposons, however, are located in the intergenic or intronic regions up to hundreds of kilobases from the promoters of linked genes (2,8). Whether these distant retrotransposons serve a beneficial host function is not known.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%