Cited by 59Sperm and Testicular FunctionCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsGenomics and Rare Diseases

Visualizing the origins of selfish de novo mutations in individual seminiferous tubules of human testes

Open access
Maher, Geoffrey J., McGowan, Simon J., Giannoulatou, Eleni, Verrill, Clare, Goriely, Anne, Wilkie, Andrew O. M.·2016·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: A major goal in genetics is to understand the processes that shape the frequency of new mutations, particularly those causing human disease. Here, we focus on specific mutations in the male germline that, although initially rare, confer a growth or survival advantage to the stem cell, leading to clonal expansion over time: a process similar to early tumor growth and currently described only in humans. Previous studies supporting this “selfish” selection quantified mutations in sperm or testis pieces using methods that destroyed their cellular origins. Here, we pinpoint and identify pathogenic mutations directly within individual seminiferous tubules, the structures that generate spermatozoa. This methodology provides unprecedented precision in documenting the spectrum and prevalence of selfish mutations in men’s testes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1521325113

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 54 · Cited by 59

Authors
Maher, G. J., McGowan, S. J., Giannoulatou, E., Verrill, C., Goriely, A., & Wilkie, A. O. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Oxford University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2016-02-08
Volume
113
Issue
9
Pages
2454-2459
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2262141199
Cited by
59
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 5
FWCI
11.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (091182, 102731)
  • Simons Foundation (332759)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Sperm and Testicular Function
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Genomics and Diagnostics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomics and Rare Diseases
Keywords
de novo mutations, seminiferous tubules, male germline, spermatogonia, MAGE-A4, FGFR3, FGFR2, PTPN11, HRAS, KRAS, gain-of-function mutations, whole genome amplification, microdissection
MeSH terms
Humans, Male, Mutation, Seminiferous Tubules

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