Cited by 391

Natural selection on human microRNA binding sites inferred from SNP data

Chen, Kevin, Rajewsky, Nikolaus·2006·Nature Genetics

Abstract

A fundamental problem in biology is understanding how natural selection has shaped the evolution of gene regulation. Here we use SNP genotype data and techniques from population genetics to study an entire layer of short, cis-regulatory sites in the human genome. MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are a class of small noncoding RNAs that post-transcriptionally repress mRNA through cis-regulatory sites in 3' UTRs. We show that negative selection in humans is stronger on computationally predicted conserved miRNA binding sites than on other conserved sequence motifs in 3' UTRs, thus providing independent support for the target prediction model and explicitly demonstrating the contribution of miRNAs to darwinian fitness. Our techniques extend to nonconserved miRNA binding sites, and we estimate that 30%-50% of these are functional when the mRNA and miRNA are endogenously coexpressed. As we show that polymorphisms in predicted miRNA binding sites are likely to be deleterious, they are candidates for causal variants of human disease. We believe that our approach can be extended to studying other classes of cis-regulatory sites.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/ng1910

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chen, K., & Rajewsky, N.
Venue
Nature Genetics
Published
2006-10-29
Volume
38
Issue
12
Pages
1452-1456
ISSN
  • 1061-4036
  • 1546-1718
Cited by
391
References
5
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review