Cited by 238Chromosomal and Genetic VariationsGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesGenome Rearrangement Algorithms

Molecular archeology of L1 insertions in the human genome

Open access
Szak, Suzanne T, Pickeral, Oxana K, Makalowski, Wojciech, Boguski, Mark S, Landsman, David, Boeke, Jef D·2002·Genome Biology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As the rough draft of the human genome sequence nears a finished product and other genome-sequencing projects accumulate sequence data exponentially, bioinformatics is emerging as an important tool for studies of transposon biology. In particular, L1 elements exhibit a variety of sequence structures after insertion into the human genome that are amenable to computational analysis. We carried out a detailed analysis of the anatomy and distribution of L1 elements in the human genome using a new computer program, TSDfinder, designed to identify transposon boundaries precisely. RESULTS: Structural variants of L1 elements shared similar trends in the length and quality of their target site duplications (TSDs) and poly(A) tails. Furthermore, we found no correlation between the composition and genomic location of the pre-insertion locus and the resulting anatomy of the L1 insertion. We verified that L1 insertions with TSDs have the 5'-TTAAAA-3' cleavage site associated with L1 endonuclease activity. In addition, the second target DNA cut required for L1 insertion weakly matches the consensus pattern TTAAAA. On the other hand, the L1-internal breakpoints of deleted and inverted L1 elements do not resemble L1 endonuclease cleavage sites. Finally, the genome sequence data indicate that whereas singly inverted elements are common, doubly inverted elements are almost never found. CONCLUSIONS: The sequence data give no indication that the creation of L1 structural variants depends on characteristics of the insertion locus. In addition, the formation of 5' truncated and 5' inverted L1s are probably not due to the action of the L1 endonuclease.

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 · 10.1186/gb-2002-3-10-research0052

Cites

55 of 55 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?

  • The vast majority of L1s in the human genome are 5′ truncated; average L1 length is approximately 900 bp and 90-95% of all L1s are 5′ truncated.

    “As the vast majority of L1s in the human genome are 5′ truncated (average L1 length is approximately 900bp, 90-95% of all L1s are 5′trunctated), this analysis was unsurprisingly skewed towards the 3′ end of L1s.”

    From SIRT6 represses LINE1 retrotransposons by ribosylating KAP1 but this repression fails with stress and age (2014) · cites this paper as [53]

    The Results section, “Characteristics of 5′ truncated L1 elements” (page not provided), says most human L1s are 5′ truncated and only 5% of the study’s 3′-intact L1s were full-length. That supports roughly 95% truncation for that subset, not explicitly for all L1s. The copy does not support an average length of approximately 900 bp; “Gene neighborhood of L1 insertions” instead reports a 1,614-nucleotide mean for the TSD-containing set. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 2

  1. Symer DE Connelly C Szak ST Caputo EM Cost GJ Parmigiani G Boeke JD Human L1 retrotransposition is associated with genetic instability in vivo. Cell 2002 110 327 338 12176320
  2. Pickeral OK Baltimore MD Bioinformatics of human retrotransposons. PhD dissertation 2000 The Johns Hopkins University

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Szak, S. T., Pickeral, O. K., Makalowski, W., Boguski, M. S., Landsman, D., & Boeke, J. D.
Affiliations
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • Human Genome Sciences (United States) (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Boeke, Jef D
Venue
Genome Biology
Published
2002-09-19
Volume
3
Issue
10
Pages
research0052-research0052
ISSN
  • 1465-6906 (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-760X
OpenAlex
W2139253234
Cited by
230
References
55
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 6
FWCI
12.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genome biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (CA-16519, P01CA016519)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Chromosomal and Genetic Variations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genome Rearrangement Algorithms
Keywords
LINE-1 retrotransposons, human genome, transposon insertion, target site duplication, poly(A) tail, structural variants
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Base Sequence, Binding Sites, Humans, Poly A, Recombination, Genetic, Genome, Human, Mutagenesis, Insertional, Retroelements, Computational Biology

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