The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Single Nucleotide Polymorphism–Based Validation of Exonic Splicing Enhancers
Open accessAbstract
Because deleterious alleles arising from mutation are filtered by natural selection, mutations that create such alleles will be underrepresented in the set of common genetic variation existing in a population at any given time.Here, we describe an approach based on this idea called VERIFY (variant elimination reinforces functionality), which can be used to assess the extent of natural selection acting on an oligonucleotide motif or set of motifs predicted to have biological activity.As an application of this approach, we analyzed a set of 238 hexanucleotides previously predicted to have exonic splicing enhancer (ESE) activity in human exons using the relative enhancer and silencer classification by unanimous enrichment (RESCUE)-ESE method.Aligning the single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) from the public human SNP database to the chimpanzee genome allowed inference of the direction of the mutations that created present-day SNPs.Analyzing the set of SNPs that overlap RESCUE-ESE hexamers, we conclude that nearly one-fifth of the mutations that disrupt predicted ESEs have been eliminated by natural selection (odds ratio = 0.82 6 0.05).This selection is strongest for the predicted ESEs that are located near splice sites.Our results demonstrate a novel approach for quantifying the extent of natural selection acting on candidate functional motifs and also suggest certain features of mutations/SNPs, such as proximity to the splice site and disruption or alteration of predicted ESEs, that should be useful in identifying variants that might cause a biological phenotype.
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
dbSNP: the NCBI database of genetic variation
Sherry, S. T. (2001) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/29.1.308 · Cited by 7,502
Listening to silence and understanding nonsense: exonic mutations that affect splicing
Cartegni, L., Chew, S. L., & Krainer, A. R. (2002) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg775 · Cited by 2,209
Mutagenic deamination of cytosine residues in DNA
Duncan, B. K., & Miller, J. H. (1980) · Nature · doi:10.1038/287560a0 · Cited by 792
Cited by
Hearing silence: non-neutral evolution at synonymous sites in mammals
Chamary, J. V., Parmley, J. L., & Hurst, L. D. (2006) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg1770 · Cited by 831
Natural selection on human microRNA binding sites inferred from SNP data
Chen, K., & Rajewsky, N. (2006) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng1910 · Cited by 469
Amit, M., Donyo, M., Hollander, D., Goren, A., Kim, E., Gelfman, S., Lev-Maor, G., Burstein, D., Schwartz, S., Postolsky, B., et al. (2012) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2012.03.013 · Cited by 338
Chamary, J., & Hurst, L. D. (2005) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/gb-2005-6-9-r75 · Cited by 332
Castle, J. C., Zhang, C., Shah, J. K., Kulkarni, A. V., Kalsotra, A., Cooper, T. A., & Johnson, J. M. (2008) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/ng.264 · Cited by 324
Metadata
- Authors
- Fairbrother, W. G., Holste, D., Burge, C. B., & Sharp, P. A.
- Venue
- PLoS Biology
- Publisher
- Public Library of Science (PLoS)
- Published
- 2004-08-31
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- e268
- ISSN
- 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-7885
- OpenAlex
- W2029760674
- Cited by
- 191
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Single Nucleotide Polymorphism–Based Validation of Exonic Splicing Enhancers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020268
- The paper
- Fairbrother, W. G., Holste, D., Burge, C. B., & Sharp, P. A. (2004). Single Nucleotide Polymorphism–Based Validation of Exonic Splicing Enhancers. PLoS Biology. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020268
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.