The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Genome-wide detection of alternative splicing in expressed sequences of human genes
Open accessAbstract
We have identified 6201 alternative splice relationships in human genes, through a genome-wide analysis of expressed sequence tags (ESTs). Starting with approximately 2.1 million human mRNA and EST sequences, we mapped expressed sequences onto the draft human genome sequence and only accepted splices that obeyed the standard splice site consensus. A large fraction (47%) of these were observed multiple times, indicating that they comprise a substantial fraction of the mRNA species. The vast majority of the detected alternative forms appear to be novel, and produce highly specific, biologically meaningful control of function in both known and novel human genes, e.g. specific removal of the lysosomal targeting signal from HLA-DM beta chain, replacement of the C-terminal transmembrane domain and cytoplasmic tail in an FC receptor beta chain homolog with a different transmembrane domain and cytoplasmic tail, likely modulating its signal transduction activity. Our data indicate that a large proportion of human genes, probably 42% or more, are alternatively spliced, but that this appears to be observed mainly in certain types of molecules (e.g. cell surface receptors) and systemic functions, particularly the immune system and nervous system. These results provide a comprehensive dataset for understanding the role of alternative splicing in the human genome, accessible at http://www.bioinformatics.ucla.edu/HASDB.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Basic local alignment search tool
Altschul, S. F., Gish, W., Miller, W., Myers, E. W., & Lipman, D. J. (1990) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1006/jmbi.1990.9999 · Cited by 98,669
Needleman, S. B., & Wunsch, C. D. (1970) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/0022-2836(70)90057-4 · Cited by 11,288
THE HIGH-AFFINITY I g E RECEPTOR (FcεRI): From Physiology to Pathology
Kinet, J.-P. (1999) · Annual Review of Immunology · doi:10.1146/annurev.immunol.17.1.931 · Cited by 968
Cited by
Improving the Arabidopsis genome annotation using maximal transcript alignment assemblies
Haas, B. J. (2003) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkg770 · Cited by 2,296
Analysis of the mouse transcriptome based on functional annotation of 60,770 full-length cDNAs
The FANTOM Consortium and the RIKEN Genome Exploration Research Group Phase I & II Team* (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01266 · Cited by 1,642
Function of alternative splicing
Stamm, S., Ben-Ari, S., Rafalska, I., Tang, Y., Zhang, Z., Toiber, D., Thanaraj, T. A., & Soreq, H. (2005) · Gene · doi:10.1016/j.gene.2004.10.022 · Cited by 1,377
A genomic view of alternative splicing
Modrek, B., & Lee, C. (2002) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng0102-13 · Cited by 1,302
Self-citationVariation in alternative splicing across human tissues
Yeo, G., Holste, D., Kreiman, G., & Burge, C. B. (2004) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2004-5-10-r74 · Cited by 584
Metadata
- Authors
- Modrek, B.
- Venue
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-07-01
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 13
- Pages
- 2850-2859
- ISSN
- 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
- 1362-4962
- OpenAlex
- W1994154030
- Cited by
- 679
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 18.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Genome-wide detection of alternative splicing in expressed sequences of human genes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/nar/29.13.2850
- The paper
- Modrek, B. (2001). Genome-wide detection of alternative splicing in expressed sequences of human genes. Nucleic Acids Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/29.13.2850
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.