ArticleBMC genomics2018
Motifome comparison between modern human, Neanderthal and Denisovan.
Article in BMC genomics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- K-mer-Based Motif Analysis in Insect Species acrossComputational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe availability of the genomes of two archaic humans, Neanderthal and Denisovan, and that of modern humans provides researchers an opportunity to investigate genetic differences between these three subspecies on a genome-wide scale. Here we describe an algorithm that predicts statistically significant motifs based on the difference between a given motif's actual and expected distributions. The algorithm was previously applied to plants but was modified for this work.
resultsThe result of applying the algorithm to the human, Neanderthal, and Denisovan genomes is a catalog of potential regulatory motifs in these three human subspecies. We examined the distributions of these motifs in genetic elements including human retroviruses, human accelerated regions, and human accelerated conserved noncoding sequences regions. Differences in these distributions could be the origin of differences in phenotype between the three subspecies. Twenty significant motifs common to all three genomes were found; thirty-three were found in endogenous retroviruses in Neanderthal and Denisovan. Ten of these motifs mapped to the 22 bp core of MiR-1304. The core of this genetic element regulates the ENAM and AMTN genes, which take part in odontogenesis and whose 3' UTRs contained significant motifs. The introns of 20 genes were found to contain a large number of significant motifs, which were also overrepresented in 49 human accelerated regions. These genes include NAV2, SorCS2, TRAPPC9, GRID1, PRDM16, CAMTA1, and ASIC which are all involved in neuroregulation. Further analysis of these genes using the GO database indicates that many are associated with neurodevelopment. Also, varying numbers of significant motifs were found to occur in regions of the Neanderthal and Denisovan genomes that are missing from the human genome, suggesting further functional differences between modern and archaic humans.
conclusionAlthough Neanderthal and Denisovan are now extinct, detailed examination of elements from their genomes can shed light on possible phenotypic and cognitive differences between these two archaic human subspecies and modern humans. Genetic similarities and differences between these three subspecies and other fossil hominids would also be of interest.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.