The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Slipped-strand mispairing: a major mechanism for DNA sequence evolution.
Open accessAbstract
Simple repetitive DNA sequences are a widespread and abundant feature of genomic DNA. The following several features characterize such sequences: (1) they typically consist of a variety of repeated motifs of 1-10 bases--but may include much larger repeats as well; (2) larger repeat units often include shorter ones within them; (3) long polypyrimidine and poly-CA tracts are often found; and (4) tandem arrangements of closely related motifs are often found. We propose that slipped-strand mispairing events, in concert with unequal crossing-over, can readily account for all of these features. The frequent occurrence of long tandem repeats of particular motifs (polypyrimidine and poly-CA tracts) appears to result from nonrandom patterns of nucleotide substitution. We argue that the intrahelical process of slipped-strand mispairing is much more likely to be the major factor in the initial expansion of short repeated motifs and that, after initial expansion, simple tandem repeats may be predisposed to further expansion by unequal crossing-over or other interhelical events because of their propensity to mispair. Evidence is presented that single-base repeats (the shortest possible motifs) are represented by longer runs in mammalian introns than would be expected on a random basis, supporting the idea that SSM may be a ubiquitous force in the evolution of the eukaryotic genome. Simple repetitive sequences may therefore represent a natural ground state of DNA unselected for coding functions.
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
Frameshift Mutations and the Genetic Code
Streisinger, G., Okada, Y., Emrich, J., Newton, J., Tsugita, A., Terzaghi, E., & Inouye, M. (1966) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.1966.031.01.014 · Cited by 1,400
Cited by
Molecular Biology and Pathogenicity of Mycoplasmas
Razin, S., Yogev, D., & Naot, Y. (1998) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.62.4.1094-1156.1998 · Cited by 1,930
Current trends in microsatellite genotyping
GUICHOUX, E., LAGACHE, L., WAGNER, S., CHAUMEIL, P., LÉGER, P., LEPAIS, O., LEPOITTEVIN, C., MALAUSA, T., REVARDEL, E., SALIN, F., et al. (2011) · Molecular Ecology Resources · doi:10.1111/j.1755-0998.2011.03014.x · Cited by 937
Adaptive evolution of highly mutable loci in pathogenic bacteria
Moxon, E. R., Rainey, P. B., Nowak, M. A., & Lenski, R. E. (1994) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/s0960-9822(00)00005-1 · Cited by 755
Short-sequence DNA repeats in prokaryotic genomes
van Belkum, A., Scherer, S., van Alphen, L., & Verbrugh, H. (1998) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.62.2.275-293.1998 · Cited by 737
Detection of genetic diversity in closely related bread wheat using microsatellite markers
Plaschke, J., Ganal, M. W., & Röder, M. S. (1995) · Theoretical and Applied Genetics · doi:10.1007/bf00223912 · Cited by 710
Metadata
- Venue
- Molecular Biology and Evolution
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1987-05
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 203-21
- ISSN
- 0737-4038 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-1719
- OpenAlex
- W1935763178
- Cited by
- 2,245
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 29.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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: Slipped-strand mispairing: a major mechanism for DNA sequence evolution. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040442
- The paper
- Slipped-strand mispairing: a major mechanism for DNA sequence evolution. (1987). Molecular Biology and Evolution. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a040442
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.