Cited by 26

A high-resolution map of the human small non-coding transcriptome

Fehlmann, Tobias, Backes, Christina, Alles, Julia, Fischer, Ulrike, Hart, Martin, Kern, Fabian, Langseth, Hilde, Rounge, Trine +12 more·2018·Bioinformatics

Abstract

Motivation: Although the amount of small non-coding RNA-sequencing data is continuously increasing, it is still unclear to which extent small RNAs are represented in the human genome. Results: In this study we analyzed 303 billion sequencing reads from nearly 25 000 datasets to answer this question. We determined that 0.8% of the human genome are reliably covered by 874 123 regions with an average length of 31 nt. On the basis of these regions, we found that among the known small non-coding RNA classes, microRNAs were the most prevalent. In subsequent steps, we characterized variations of miRNAs and performed a staged validation of 11 877 candidate miRNAs. Of these, many were actually expressed and significantly dysregulated in lung cancer. Selected candidates were finally validated by northern blots. Although isolated miRNAs could still be present in the human genome, our presented set likely contains the largest fraction of human miRNAs. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

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 · 10.1093/bioinformatics/btx814

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • 87 out of 473 novel miRNA were previously reported within other studies.

    “We also found that 87 out of 473 novel miRNA were previously reported within other studies (48–52)”

    From A mouse tissue atlas of small noncoding RNA (2020) · cites this paper as [49]

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Backes,C. et al. (2017) miRCarta: a central repository for collecting miRNA candidates. Nucleic Acids Res., doi: 10.1093/nar/gkx851. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fehlmann, T., Backes, C., Alles, J., Fischer, U., Hart, M., Kern, F., Langseth, H., Rounge, T., Umu, S. U., Kahraman, M., Laufer, T., Haas, J., Staehler, C., Ludwig, N., Hübenthal, M., Meder, B., Franke, A., Lenhof, H.-P., Meese, E., & Keller, A.
Affiliations
  • Chair for Clinical Bioinformatics, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany
  • Department of Human Genetics, Saarland University, Homburg, Germany
  • Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-based Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway
  • Hummingbird Diagnostics GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany
  • Department of Internal Medicine III, University Hospital Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
  • Institute of Clinical Molecular Biology, Christian-Albrechts-University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany
  • Center for Bioinformatics, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany
Venue
Bioinformatics
Published
2017-12-21
Volume
34
Issue
10
Pages
1621-1628
ISSN
  • 1367-4803
  • 1367-4811
Cited by
26
References
3
Language
en
Funders
Michael J. Fox Foundation

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