CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 130

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Parkinson's disease CircRNAs Resource reveals a link between circSLC8A1 and oxidative stress

Hanan, Mor, Simchovitz, Alon, Yayon, Nadav, Vaknine, Shani, Cohen‐Fultheim, Roni, Karmon, Miriam, Madrer, Nimrod, Rohrlich, Talia Miriam, Maman, Moria, Bennett, Estelle R, Greenberg, David S, Meshorer, Eran, Levanon, Erez Y, Soreq, Hermona, Kadener, Sebastian·2020·EMBO Molecular Medicine
DOI 10.15252/emmm.201911942PMC PMC7507321
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Circular RNAs (circRNAs) are brain‐abundant RNAs of mostly unknown functions. To seek their roles in Parkinson's disease (PD), we generated an RNA sequencing resource of several brain region tissues from dozens of PD and control donors. In the healthy substantia nigra (SN), circRNAs accumulate in an age‐dependent manner, but in the PD SN this correlation is lost and the total number of circRNAs reduced. In contrast, the levels of circRNAs are increased in the other studied brain regions of PD patients. We also found circSLC8A1 to increase in the SN of PD individuals. CircSLC8A1 carries 7 binding sites for miR‐128 and is strongly bound to the microRNA effector protein Ago2. Indeed, RNA targets of miR‐128 are also increased in PD individuals, suggesting that circSLC8A1 regulates miR‐128 function and/or activity. CircSLC8A1 levels also increased in cultured cells exposed to the oxidative stress‐inducing agent paraquat but were decreased in cells treated with the neuroprotective antioxidant regulator drug Simvastatin. Together, our work links circSLC8A1 to oxidative stress‐related Parkinsonism and suggests further exploration of its molecular function in PD.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.15252/emmm.201911942

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure EV1 Tissues retrieved and experimental in‐house RNA sequencing methodology ABrain region origin of tissues retrieved from the NBB detailing each brain area.BAverage RIN plot of RNA prepared from the frozen tissues.CLibrary preparation key steps (see details in Materials and Methods).DLibrary plot in a TapeStation run.E–GNumber of circRNAs detected in each sample of all 3 regions. Samples with < 5,000 circRNAs were removed from the analysis.HNumber of samples from PD and control from each tissue that were included in the analysis.INumber of total reads and circRNAs from each tissue.
Figure EV1 Tissues retrieved and experimental in‐house RNA sequencing methodology ABrain region origin of tissues retrieved from the NBB detailing each brain area.BAverage RIN plot of RNA prepared from the frozen tissues.CLibrary preparation key steps (see details in Materials and Methods).DLibrary plot in a TapeStation run.E–GNumber of circRNAs detected in each sample of all 3 regions. Samples with < 5,000 circRNAs were removed from the analysis.HNumber of samples from PD and control from each tissue that were included in the analysis.INumber of total reads and circRNAs from each tissue.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 1 Brain region‐specific mRNA profiles indicate multicellular PD‐related processes ABrain region origin of tissues: SN (blue), MTG (green), and AMG (red).BNon‐supervised clustering heatmap plot indicates substantial clustering of transcripts from each tissue but not of transcripts from patients compared to controls. PD samples indicated in red.CPCA clustering of all RNA molecules in the SN control (green) and PD samples (blue).DqPCR validation of TH levels in SN samples of PD and controls, normalized to beta‐actin mRNA. t‐test *P = 0.025. Data presented as mean ± SD. n = 18 for CT and 24 for PD.ETop enriched GO pathways of DE genes in the SN of PD vs controls and the corresponding logP values, Wald test (DEseq2 analysis).F, GVenn diagrams demonstrating cell type‐specific DE genes in the SN of PD vs control tissues, up/down arrows indicate gene groups that were up/down regulated.HModule–trait relationship of WGCNA analysis showing correlation and corrected P values (in brackets) for each gene module (indicated by colors) as related to the different external traits selected (disease condition, brain region, age, and sex). Correlation test p value calculated by WGCNA package.IModule membership vs. gene significance in selected modules as reflecting external sample traits: disease condition (reflected in the brown and red modules), brain region (the blue module), and sex (the cyan module), regression‐based p value calculated by WGCNA analysis. n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control, and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD.JSignificant GO terms that emerged as associated with the blue, red, and brown modules and the corresponding log P values, Fisher's exact P value.
Figure 1 Brain region‐specific mRNA profiles indicate multicellular PD‐related processes ABrain region origin of tissues: SN (blue), MTG (green), and AMG (red).BNon‐supervised clustering heatmap plot indicates substantial clustering of transcripts from each tissue but not of transcripts from patients compared to controls. PD samples indicated in red.CPCA clustering of all RNA molecules in the SN control (green) and PD samples (blue).DqPCR validation of TH levels in SN samples of PD and controls, normalized to beta‐actin mRNA. t‐test *P = 0.025. Data presented as mean ± SD. n = 18 for CT and 24 for PD.ETop enriched GO pathways of DE genes in the SN of PD vs controls and the corresponding logP values, Wald test (DEseq2 analysis).F, GVenn diagrams demonstrating cell type‐specific DE genes in the SN of PD vs control tissues, up/down arrows indicate gene groups that were up/down regulated.HModule–trait relationship of WGCNA analysis showing correlation and corrected P values (in brackets) for each gene module (indicated by colors) as related to the different external traits selected (disease condition, brain region, age, and sex). Correlation test p value calculated by WGCNA package.IModule membership vs. gene significance in selected modules as reflecting external sample traits: disease condition (reflected in the brown and red modules), brain region (the blue module), and sex (the cyan module), regression‐based p value calculated by WGCNA analysis. n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control, and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD.JSignificant GO terms that emerged as associated with the blue, red, and brown modules and the corresponding log P values, Fisher's exact P value.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure EV2 PCA analysis of all tissues and of PD vs control samples, WGCNA analysis QC, clustering of the samples and modules APCA of all mRNA samples from all tissues.BSubstantia nigra sample heatmap, relative expression of each gene is represented by colors, marked by the color key: Reduction in expression is represented by light green and elevation is represented by blue.C, DPCA plot of control vs PD samples in the amygdala and MTG.ESample dendrogram showing sample clustering and the different classification patterns of external traits for each sample.FCluster dendrogram of all genes.G, Hlog2 fold change and −log P value of known DE splicing factors in PD SN vs control SN. n = 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. Data presented as mean ± SD, Walt test (DEseq2 analysis).
Figure EV2 PCA analysis of all tissues and of PD vs control samples, WGCNA analysis QC, clustering of the samples and modules APCA of all mRNA samples from all tissues.BSubstantia nigra sample heatmap, relative expression of each gene is represented by colors, marked by the color key: Reduction in expression is represented by light green and elevation is represented by blue.C, DPCA plot of control vs PD samples in the amygdala and MTG.ESample dendrogram showing sample clustering and the different classification patterns of external traits for each sample.FCluster dendrogram of all genes.G, Hlog2 fold change and −log P value of known DE splicing factors in PD SN vs control SN. n = 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. Data presented as mean ± SD, Walt test (DEseq2 analysis).CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 CircRNA abundance is brain region‐dependent and PD‐modified AmRNA processing either involves unidirectional splicing, creating linear mRNA transcripts, or back‐splicing generating circRNAs.B, CVenn diagram (not to scale) showing brain region‐ and disease‐characteristic circRNA abundance patterns in analyzed brain regions and disease state.DHeatmap of circRNA abundance, indicating significant tissue‐based SN clustering, PD samples indicated in red.E, FPie chart demonstrating brain‐specific expression of mRNAs (E) in comparison to circRNAs (F).GVenn diagram demonstrating predicted cell‐type characteristics of circRNA host genes in the SN.
Figure 2 CircRNA abundance is brain region‐dependent and PD‐modified AmRNA processing either involves unidirectional splicing, creating linear mRNA transcripts, or back‐splicing generating circRNAs.B, CVenn diagram (not to scale) showing brain region‐ and disease‐characteristic circRNA abundance patterns in analyzed brain regions and disease state.DHeatmap of circRNA abundance, indicating significant tissue‐based SN clustering, PD samples indicated in red.E, FPie chart demonstrating brain‐specific expression of mRNAs (E) in comparison to circRNAs (F).GVenn diagram demonstrating predicted cell‐type characteristics of circRNA host genes in the SN.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure EV3 PCA analysis of circRNA profile A–DPCA analysis of circRNA profiles in samples according to specific tissues, age, condition, and gender.ECircRNA abundance does not change in a gender‐specific manner in the tested tissues. n = 23 for females and 46 for males. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.
Figure EV3 PCA analysis of circRNA profile A–DPCA analysis of circRNA profiles in samples according to specific tissues, age, condition, and gender.ECircRNA abundance does not change in a gender‐specific manner in the tested tissues. n = 23 for females and 46 for males. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 CircRNA abundance is reduced in the PD SN and negatively correlates to RNA editing levels ATotal circRNAs detected in the SN, MTG, and AMG of both PD and control donors, *P = 0.02 *P = 0.026 and *P = 0.022 for comparison between PD and CT in SN, MTG,and AMG. t‐test for total SN vs MTG *P = 2.27E‐8 and SN vs AMG *P = 5.86E‐10. n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values. P value was calculated by t‐test.BGlobal editing levels in the 3 brain regions are based on the Alu editing index, representing the weighted average editing level across all expressed Alu sequences, Wilcoxon, corrected *P = 0.038, 0.055 and 0.42 for amygdala, MTG and SN. Wilcoxon test between the Alu editing index of control and PD samples.CGlobal RNA editing levels based on the Alu editing index, studied only in Alu elements within circRNA exons and their flanking introns, in the 3 brain regions, for circRNAs corrected *P = 0.025 and 0.040 for the AMG and MTG and P = 0.3 for SN. For flanking introns, *P = 0.02 and 0.040 for AMG and MTG and P = 0.34 for SN, Wilcoxon test. n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.DNegative correlation between total RNA editing and circRNA abundance, correlation = −0.37, correlation test p value = 0.0015.EAdar1 expression levels in all tissues. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.F, GCorrelations between circRNAs detected in each sample and the age of the control (green, correlation = 0.68, P = 0.032) and PD donors (blue, correlation = −0.14, P = 0.62).HVolcano plot of DE circRNAs in PD vs control tissues, red dots indicate statistically significant DE circRNAs according to FDR correction of Wald test (DEseq2 analysis). CircSLC8A1 is marked is red.
Figure 3 CircRNA abundance is reduced in the PD SN and negatively correlates to RNA editing levels ATotal circRNAs detected in the SN, MTG, and AMG of both PD and control donors, *P = 0.02 *P = 0.026 and *P = 0.022 for comparison between PD and CT in SN, MTG,and AMG. t‐test for total SN vs MTG *P = 2.27E‐8 and SN vs AMG *P = 5.86E‐10. n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values. P value was calculated by t‐test.BGlobal editing levels in the 3 brain regions are based on the Alu editing index, representing the weighted average editing level across all expressed Alu sequences, Wilcoxon, corrected *P = 0.038, 0.055 and 0.42 for amygdala, MTG and SN. Wilcoxon test between the Alu editing index of control and PD samples.CGlobal RNA editing levels based on the Alu editing index, studied only in Alu elements within circRNA exons and their flanking introns, in the 3 brain regions, for circRNAs corrected *P = 0.025 and 0.040 for the AMG and MTG and P = 0.3 for SN. For flanking introns, *P = 0.02 and 0.040 for AMG and MTG and P = 0.34 for SN, Wilcoxon test. n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.DNegative correlation between total RNA editing and circRNA abundance, correlation = −0.37, correlation test p value = 0.0015.EAdar1 expression levels in all tissues. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.F, GCorrelations between circRNAs detected in each sample and the age of the control (green, correlation = 0.68, P = 0.032) and PD donors (blue, correlation = −0.14, P = 0.62).HVolcano plot of DE circRNAs in PD vs control tissues, red dots indicate statistically significant DE circRNAs according to FDR correction of Wald test (DEseq2 analysis). CircSLC8A1 is marked is red.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure EV4 RNA Editing in PD sample and controls AHyper‐editing levels in all 3 tissues, PD, and controls, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.BGlobal editing levels measured by Alu editing index comparing the three different tissues in PD or control, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.C Alu editing index showing that A‐to-G mismatch is the most dominant, as other mismatches are a result of noise or other biological mechanisms and should be much lower than the A‐to-I (viewed as A‐to-G) RNA editing signal, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.D Alu editing index in circRNAs and flanking introns, in 3 different intron windows: 1,000, 5,000, and 10,000 nucleotides, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.
Figure EV4 RNA Editing in PD sample and controls AHyper‐editing levels in all 3 tissues, PD, and controls, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.BGlobal editing levels measured by Alu editing index comparing the three different tissues in PD or control, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.C Alu editing index showing that A‐to-G mismatch is the most dominant, as other mismatches are a result of noise or other biological mechanisms and should be much lower than the A‐to-I (viewed as A‐to-G) RNA editing signal, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.D Alu editing index in circRNAs and flanking introns, in 3 different intron windows: 1,000, 5,000, and 10,000 nucleotides, n = 8 for amygdala control, 15 for amygdala PD, 8 for MTG control and 13 for MTG PD, 10 for SN control and 15 for SN PD. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 CircSLC8A1 increases in the PD brain and upon PQ exposure are accompanied by suppression of the SLC8A1 protein AGraphic representation of circSLC8A1 and its post‐transcriptional regulation in PD and under PQ exposure.B, CCircSLC8A1 and linear SLC8A1 levels in the SN of control and PD brains, t‐test P = 0.025, P = 0.118, respectively.DqPCR validations of circSLC8A1 and SLC8A1 mRNA changes in the SN, t‐test *P = 0.025. n = 18 for CT and 24 for PD, x defines mean values.ENo difference in circSLC8A1 levels in females and males, t‐test P = 0.583 for control and P = 0.262 for PD. n = 15 females and 16 males.. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.F, GCircSLC8A1 and linear SLC8A1 mRNA levels are correlated in control, R 2 = 0.47 t‐test P = 0.0017 but not in PD samples, R 2 = 0.016, P > 0.05. n = 18 for CT and 23 for PD. Data presented as mean ± SD. Note that y‐axis scales are different to allow better visualization.HIncreased CircSLC8A1 RNA levels in PQ‐exposed SH‐SY cells (normalized to Tubb3 and RPL19) while other circRNAs remain unchanged, t‐test *P = 0.028 and *P = 0.0215 for 25 μM and 50 μM, respectively. n = 4 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.I, JImmunoblot decline (Western blot and quantification) of the SLC8A1 protein in PQ‐exposed SH‐SY cells, with Tubulin as a loading control, t‐test *P = 0.015. n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.
Figure 4 CircSLC8A1 increases in the PD brain and upon PQ exposure are accompanied by suppression of the SLC8A1 protein AGraphic representation of circSLC8A1 and its post‐transcriptional regulation in PD and under PQ exposure.B, CCircSLC8A1 and linear SLC8A1 levels in the SN of control and PD brains, t‐test P = 0.025, P = 0.118, respectively.DqPCR validations of circSLC8A1 and SLC8A1 mRNA changes in the SN, t‐test *P = 0.025. n = 18 for CT and 24 for PD, x defines mean values.ENo difference in circSLC8A1 levels in females and males, t‐test P = 0.583 for control and P = 0.262 for PD. n = 15 females and 16 males.. The box is drawn from Q1 to Q3 with a horizontal line drawn in the middle to denote the median and x marks the average. Whiskers mark minimum or maximum values.F, GCircSLC8A1 and linear SLC8A1 mRNA levels are correlated in control, R 2 = 0.47 t‐test P = 0.0017 but not in PD samples, R 2 = 0.016, P > 0.05. n = 18 for CT and 23 for PD. Data presented as mean ± SD. Note that y‐axis scales are different to allow better visualization.HIncreased CircSLC8A1 RNA levels in PQ‐exposed SH‐SY cells (normalized to Tubb3 and RPL19) while other circRNAs remain unchanged, t‐test *P = 0.028 and *P = 0.0215 for 25 μM and 50 μM, respectively. n = 4 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.I, JImmunoblot decline (Western blot and quantification) of the SLC8A1 protein in PQ‐exposed SH‐SY cells, with Tubulin as a loading control, t‐test *P = 0.015. n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 CircSLC8A1 is reduced under neuroprotection AqPCR measurements of circSLC8A1 and SLC8A1 mRNA after SH‐SY treatment of statins or the PF LRRK2 inhibitor, t‐test **P = 0.007 and **P = 0.01 for PF‐06447475 and *P = 0.047 and *P = 0.0136 for statins for cirSLC8A1 and SLC8A1 mRNA, respectively, n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.B, CProtein gel and quantification of SLC8A1 and Tubulin as a loading control in statin and PF‐treated neuronal cell cultures, t‐test *P = 0.027 for statins and *P = 0.011 for PF‐06447475, n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.DSLC8A1 immunostaining of statin‐treated SH‐SY cells.
Figure 5 CircSLC8A1 is reduced under neuroprotection AqPCR measurements of circSLC8A1 and SLC8A1 mRNA after SH‐SY treatment of statins or the PF LRRK2 inhibitor, t‐test **P = 0.007 and **P = 0.01 for PF‐06447475 and *P = 0.047 and *P = 0.0136 for statins for cirSLC8A1 and SLC8A1 mRNA, respectively, n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.B, CProtein gel and quantification of SLC8A1 and Tubulin as a loading control in statin and PF‐treated neuronal cell cultures, t‐test *P = 0.027 for statins and *P = 0.011 for PF‐06447475, n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.DSLC8A1 immunostaining of statin‐treated SH‐SY cells.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Cytoplasmic circSLC8A1 binds Ago2 and regulates miR‐128 targets AGene structure and conservation of the human and murine SLC8A1 gene. The box marks the second exon that circularizes to create circSLC8A1.BqPCR quantification from nuclear/cytoplasmic fractionations of SH‐SY cells, t‐test P = 0.005 for circSLC8A1, P = 0.009 for NEAT1 and P = 0.009 for Rpl19. n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.CqPCR quantification of Ago2‐bound RNA, immunoprecipitated (IP)/input values normalized to negative control for a known Ago2 target, circCDR1as, and circSLC8A1, t‐test P = 0.029 for circSLC8A1 and P = 0.001 for circCDR1as, n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.DSchematic representation of circSLC8A1 with Ago2‐binding sites from CLIP‐seq and predicted miRNA binding sites.EmiRNAs predicted to bind circSLC8A1 with 3 sites and more.FSchematic representation of circSLC8A1‐Ago2 complex binding and its effect on miR‐128 targets.GRelative expression of known miR‐128 targets from SN RNA‐seq, **P = 0.0004 for BMI1, *P = 0.011 for SIRT1 and *P = 0.005 for AXIN1.HRelative expression of known miR‐128 targets in SH‐SY cells treated with Paraquat, t‐test *P = 0.03, *P = 0.02 and *P = 0.002 for AXIN1, BM1 and SIRT1, respectively. Data presented as mean ± SD with 4–6 biological replicas for each condition.ImiR enrichment analysis of DE genes in SN from validated miR‐targets.
Figure 6 Cytoplasmic circSLC8A1 binds Ago2 and regulates miR‐128 targets AGene structure and conservation of the human and murine SLC8A1 gene. The box marks the second exon that circularizes to create circSLC8A1.BqPCR quantification from nuclear/cytoplasmic fractionations of SH‐SY cells, t‐test P = 0.005 for circSLC8A1, P = 0.009 for NEAT1 and P = 0.009 for Rpl19. n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.CqPCR quantification of Ago2‐bound RNA, immunoprecipitated (IP)/input values normalized to negative control for a known Ago2 target, circCDR1as, and circSLC8A1, t‐test P = 0.029 for circSLC8A1 and P = 0.001 for circCDR1as, n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.DSchematic representation of circSLC8A1 with Ago2‐binding sites from CLIP‐seq and predicted miRNA binding sites.EmiRNAs predicted to bind circSLC8A1 with 3 sites and more.FSchematic representation of circSLC8A1‐Ago2 complex binding and its effect on miR‐128 targets.GRelative expression of known miR‐128 targets from SN RNA‐seq, **P = 0.0004 for BMI1, *P = 0.011 for SIRT1 and *P = 0.005 for AXIN1.HRelative expression of known miR‐128 targets in SH‐SY cells treated with Paraquat, t‐test *P = 0.03, *P = 0.02 and *P = 0.002 for AXIN1, BM1 and SIRT1, respectively. Data presented as mean ± SD with 4–6 biological replicas for each condition.ImiR enrichment analysis of DE genes in SN from validated miR‐targets.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure EV5 Gene expression of circSLC8A1 knockdown AcircSLC8A1 expression after siRNA treatment (t‐test *P = 0.0075), n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.BsiRNA targeting circSLC8A1 does not affect SLC8A1 mRNA expression after siRNA treatment (t‐test P > 0.05). n = 6 for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.CVolcano plot of gene expression profile of siCircSLC8A1 compared to siControl, blue dots indicate corrected P < 0.05, FDR correction of Wald test (DEseq2 analysis).DEnriched Go terms of DE genes in siCircSLC8A1 compared to siControl analysis, FDR correction Wald test (DEseq2 analysis).
Figure EV5 Gene expression of circSLC8A1 knockdown AcircSLC8A1 expression after siRNA treatment (t‐test *P = 0.0075), n = 3 biological replicas for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.BsiRNA targeting circSLC8A1 does not affect SLC8A1 mRNA expression after siRNA treatment (t‐test P > 0.05). n = 6 for each condition. Data presented as mean ± SD.CVolcano plot of gene expression profile of siCircSLC8A1 compared to siControl, blue dots indicate corrected P < 0.05, FDR correction of Wald test (DEseq2 analysis).DEnriched Go terms of DE genes in siCircSLC8A1 compared to siControl analysis, FDR correction Wald test (DEseq2 analysis).CC BY · PubMed Central

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.

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?

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

Show all 17 references

Research works printed but not linked: 83

  1. Agarwal V, Bell GW, Nam JW, Bartel DP (2015) Predicting effective microRNA target sites in mammalian mRNAs. Elife 4: e05005 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Akhter R (2018) Circular RNA and Alzheimer's disease. Adv Exp Med Biol 1087: 239–243 · DOI
  3. Aktas T, Avsar Ilik I, Maticzka D, Bhardwaj V, Pessoa Rodrigues C, Mittler G, Manke T, Backofen R, Akhtar A (2017) DHX9 suppresses RNA processing defects originating from the Alu invasion of the human genome. Nature 544: 115–119 · DOI
  4. Ashwal‐Fluss R, Meyer M, Pamudurti NR, Ivanov A, Bartok O, Hanan M, Evantal N, Memczak S, Rajewsky N, Kadener S (2014) circRNA biogenesis competes with pre‐mRNA splicing. Mol Cell 56: 55–66 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Barbash S, Simchovitz A, Buchman AS, Bennett DA, Shifman S, Soreq H (2017) Neuronal‐expressed microRNA‐targeted pseudogenes compete with coding genes in the human brain. Transl Psychiatry 7: e1199 · DOI
  6. Berry C, La Vecchia C, Nicotera P (2010) Paraquat and Parkinson's disease. Cell Death Differ 17: 1115–1125 · DOI
  7. Braak H, Del Tredici K, Rub U, de Vos RA, Jansen Steur EN, Braak E (2003) Staging of brain pathology related to sporadic Parkinson's disease. Neurobiol Aging 24: 197–211 · DOI · Paper page
  8. Chatoo W, Abdouh M, David J, Champagne MP, Ferreira J, Rodier F, Bernier G (2009) The polycomb group gene Bmi1 regulates antioxidant defenses in neurons by repressing p53 pro‐oxidant activity. J Neurosci 29: 529–542 · DOI
  9. Chen YG, Kim MV, Chen X, Batista PJ, Aoyama S, Wilusz JE, Iwasaki A, Chang HY (2017) Sensing self and foreign circular RNAs by intron identity. Mol Cell 67: 228–238.e5 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Collier TJ, Kanaan NM, Kordower JH (2011) Ageing as a primary risk factor for Parkinson's disease: evidence from studies of non‐human primates. Nat Rev Neurosci 12: 359–366 · DOI
  11. Conn SJ, Pillman KA, Toubia J, Conn VM, Salmanidis M, Phillips CA, Roslan S, Schreiber AW, Gregory PA, Goodall GJ (2015) The RNA binding protein quaking regulates formation of circRNAs. Cell 160: 1125–1134 · DOI
  12. Cortes‐Lopez M, Gruner MR, Cooper DA, Gruner HN, Voda AI, van der Linden AM, Miura P (2018) Global accumulation of circRNAs during aging in Caenorhabditis elegans. BMC Genom 19: 8 · DOI
  13. Dobin A, Davis CA, Schlesinger F, Drenkow J, Zaleski C, Jha S, Batut P, Chaisson M, Gingeras TR (2013) STAR: ultrafast universal RNA‐seq aligner. Bioinformatics 29: 15–21 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Duda J, Potschke C, Liss B (2016) Converging roles of ion channels, calcium, metabolic stress, and activity pattern of Substantia nigra dopaminergic neurons in health and Parkinson's disease. J Neurochem 139(Suppl. 1): 156–178 · DOI
  15. Errichelli L, Dini Modigliani S, Laneve P, Colantoni A, Legnini I, Capauto D, Rosa A, De Santis R, Scarfo R, Peruzzi G et al (2017) FUS affects circular RNA expression in murine embryonic stem cell‐derived motor neurons. Nat Commun 8: 14741 · DOI
  16. Farrer MJ (2006) Genetics of Parkinson disease: paradigm shifts and future prospects. Nat Rev Genet 7: 306–318 · DOI
  17. Farrer MJ, Haugarvoll K, Ross OA, Stone JT, Milkovic NM, Cobb SA, Whittle AJ, Lincoln SJ, Hulihan MM, Heckman MG et al (2006) Genomewide association, Parkinson disease, and PARK10. Am J Hum Genet 78: 1084–1088; author reply 1092‐4 · DOI
  18. Fu RH, Liu SP, Huang SJ, Chen HJ, Chen PR, Lin YH, Ho YC, Chang WL, Tsai CH, Shyu WC et al (2013) Aberrant alternative splicing events in Parkinson's disease. Cell Transplant 22: 653–661 · DOI
  19. Gal‐Mark N, Shallev L, Sweetat S, Barak M, Billy Li J, Levanon EY, Eisenberg E, Behar O (2017) Abnormalities in A‐to‐I RNA editing patterns in CNS injuries correlate with dynamic changes in cell type composition. Sci Rep 7: 43421 · DOI
  20. Gruner H, Cortes‐Lopez M, Cooper DA, Bauer M, Miura P (2016) CircRNA accumulation in the aging mouse brain. Sci Rep 6: 38907 · DOI
  21. Guo JU, Agarwal V, Guo H, Bartel DP (2014) Expanded identification and characterization of mammalian circular RNAs. Genome Biol 15: 409 · DOI
  22. He L, Vasiliou K, Nebert DW (2009) Analysis and update of the human solute carrier (SLC) gene superfamily. Hum Genomics 3: 195–206 · DOI
  23. Holdt LM, Stahringer A, Sass K, Pichler G, Kulak NA, Wilfert W, Kohlmaier A, Herbst A, Northoff BH, Nicolaou A et al (2016) Circular non‐coding RNA ANRIL modulates ribosomal RNA maturation and atherosclerosis in humans. Nat Commun 7: 12429 · DOI
  24. da Huang W, Sherman BT, Lempicki RA (2009) Systematic and integrative analysis of large gene lists using DAVID bioinformatics resources. Nat Protoc 4: 44–57 · DOI · Paper page
  25. Ivanov A, Memczak S, Wyler E, Torti F, Porath HT, Orejuela MR, Piechotta M, Levanon EY, Landthaler M, Dieterich C et al (2015) Analysis of intron sequences reveals hallmarks of circular RNA biogenesis in animals. Cell Rep 10: 170–177 · DOI
  26. Jeck WR, Sharpless NE (2014) Detecting and characterizing circular RNAs. Nat Biotechnol 32: 453–461 · DOI
  27. Kalia LV, Lang AE (2015) Parkinson's disease. Lancet 386: 896–912 · DOI · Paper page
  28. Khananshvili D (2013) The SLC8 gene family of sodium‐calcium exchangers (NCX) ‐ structure, function, and regulation in health and disease. Mol Aspects Med 34: 220–235 · DOI
  29. Khananshvili D (2014) Sodium‐calcium exchangers (NCX): molecular hallmarks underlying the tissue‐specific and systemic functions. Pflugers Arch 466: 43–60 · DOI
  30. Kim D, Pertea G, Trapnell C, Pimentel H, Kelley R, Salzberg SL (2013) TopHat2: accurate alignment of transcriptomes in the presence of insertions, deletions and gene fusions. Genome Biol 14: R36 · DOI · Paper page
  31. Kitao T, Takuma K, Kawasaki T, Inoue Y, Ikehara A, Nashida T, Ago Y, Matsuda T (2010) The Na+/Ca2+ exchanger‐mediated Ca2+ influx triggers nitric oxide‐induced cytotoxicity in cultured astrocytes. Neurochem Int 57: 58–66 · DOI
  32. Kleaveland B, Shi CY, Stefano J, Bartel DP (2018) A network of noncoding regulatory RNAs acts in the mammalian brain. Cell 174: 350–362.e17 · DOI
  33. La Cognata V, D'Agata V, Cavalcanti F, Cavallaro S (2015) Splicing: is there an alternative contribution to Parkinson's disease? Neurogenetics 16: 245–263 · DOI
  34. Lai TS, Davies C, Greenberg CS (2010) Human tissue transglutaminase is inhibited by pharmacologic and chemical acetylation. Protein Sci 19: 229–235 · DOI
  35. Langmead B, Salzberg SL (2012) Fast gapped‐read alignment with Bowtie 2. Nat Methods 9: 357–359 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Lau P, Bossers K, Janky R, Salta E, Frigerio CS, Barbash S, Rothman R, Sierksma AS, Thathiah A, Greenberg D et al (2013) Alteration of the microRNA network during the progression of Alzheimer's disease. EMBO Mol Med 5: 1613–1634 · DOI · Paper page
  37. Legnini I, Di Timoteo G, Rossi F, Morlando M, Briganti F, Sthandier O, Fatica A, Santini T, Andronache A, Wade M et al (2017) Circ‐ZNF609 is a circular RNA that can be translated and functions in myogenesis. Mol Cell 66: 22–37.e9 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Levanon EY, Eisenberg E, Yelin R, Nemzer S, Hallegger M, Shemesh R, Fligelman ZY, Shoshan A, Pollock SR, Sztybel D et al (2004) Systematic identification of abundant A‐to‐I editing sites in the human transcriptome. Nat Biotechnol 22: 1001–1005 · DOI
  39. Lewis PA, Cookson MR (2012) Gene expression in the Parkinson's disease brain. Brain Res Bull 88: 302–312 · DOI
  40. Li M, Xie X, Zhou J, Sheng M, Yin X, Ko EA, Zhou T, Gu W (2017a) Quantifying circular RNA expression from RNA‐seq data using model‐based framework. Bioinformatics 33: 2131–2139 · DOI
  41. Li X, Liu CX, Xue W, Zhang Y, Jiang S, Yin QF, Wei J, Yao RW, Yang L, Chen LL (2017b) Coordinated circRNA biogenesis and function with NF90/NF110 in viral infection. Mol Cell 67: 214–227.e7 · DOI
  42. Li X, Yang L, Chen LL (2018) The biogenesis, functions, and challenges of circular RNAs. Mol Cell 71: 428–442 · DOI
  43. Liang WC, Wong CW, Liang PP, Shi M, Cao Y, Rao ST, Tsui SK, Waye MM, Zhang Q, Fu WM et al (2019) Translation of the circular RNA circbeta‐catenin promotes liver cancer cell growth through activation of the Wnt pathway. Genome Biol 20: 84 · DOI
  44. Liu EY, Cali CP, Lee EB (2017) RNA metabolism in neurodegenerative disease. Dis Model Mech 10: 509–518 · DOI
  45. Lorenzini I, Moore S, Sattler R (2018) RNA editing deficiency in neurodegeneration. Adv Neurobiol 20: 63–83 · DOI
  46. McCarthy DJ, Chen Y, Smyth GK (2012) Differential expression analysis of multifactor RNA‐Seq experiments with respect to biological variation. Nucleic Acids Res 40: 4288–4297 · DOI · Paper page
  47. Miller DW, Hague SM, Clarimon J, Baptista M, Gwinn‐Hardy K, Cookson MR, Singleton AB (2004) Alpha‐synuclein in blood and brain from familial Parkinson disease with SNCA locus triplication. Neurology 62: 1835–1838 · DOI
  48. Min SW, Sohn PD, Cho SH, Swanson RA, Gan L (2013) Sirtuins in neurodegenerative diseases: an update on potential mechanisms. Front Aging Neurosci 5: 53
  49. Moran LB, Duke DC, Deprez M, Dexter DT, Pearce RK, Graeber MB (2006) Whole genome expression profiling of the medial and lateral substantia nigra in Parkinson's disease. Neurogenetics 7: 1–11 · DOI
  50. Pamudurti NR, Bartok O, Jens M, Ashwal‐Fluss R, Stottmeister C, Ruhe L, Hanan M, Wyler E, Perez‐Hernandez D, Ramberger E et al (2017) Translation of CircRNAs. Mol Cell 66: 9–21.e7 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Patro R, Mount SM, Kingsford C (2014) Sailfish enables alignment‐free isoform quantification from RNA‐seq reads using lightweight algorithms. Nat Biotechnol 32: 462–464 · DOI · Paper page
  52. Paz‐Yaacov N, Bazak L, Buchumenski I, Porath HT, Danan‐Gotthold M, Knisbacher BA, Eisenberg E, Levanon EY (2015) Elevated RNA editing activity is a major contributor to transcriptomic diversity in tumors. Cell Rep 13: 267–276 · DOI
  53. Porath HT, Carmi S, Levanon EY (2014) A genome‐wide map of hyper‐edited RNA reveals numerous new sites. Nat Commun 5: 4726 · DOI
  54. Quinlan AR, Hall IM (2010) BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26: 841–842 · DOI · Paper page
  55. Rabin A, Ashwal‐Fluss R, Shenzis S, Apelblat D, Kadener S (2019) A comprehensive pipeline for accurate annotation and quantification of circRNAs. bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2019.12.15.876755 [PREPRINT] · DOI
  56. Robinson MD, McCarthy DJ, Smyth GK (2010) edgeR: a Bioconductor package for differential expression analysis of digital gene expression data. Bioinformatics 26: 139–140 · DOI · Paper page
  57. Roth SH, Levanon EY, Eisenberg E (2019) Genome‐wide quantification of ADAR adenosine‐to‐inosine RNA editing activity. Nat Methods 16: 1131–1138 · DOI
  58. Schulze M, Sommer A, Plotz S, Farrell M, Winner B, Grosch J, Winkler J, Riemenschneider MJ (2018) Sporadic Parkinson's disease derived neuronal cells show disease‐specific mRNA and small RNA signatures with abundant deregulation of piRNAs. Acta Neuropathol Commun 6: 58 · DOI
  59. Shaked I, Meerson A, Wolf Y, Avni R, Greenberg D, Gilboa‐Geffen A, Soreq H (2009) MicroRNA‐132 potentiates cholinergic anti‐inflammatory signaling by targeting acetylcholinesterase. Immunity 31: 965–973 · DOI · Paper page
  60. Shaltiel G, Hanan M, Wolf Y, Barbash S, Kovalev E, Shoham S, Soreq H (2013) Hippocampal microRNA‐132 mediates stress‐inducible cognitive deficits through its acetylcholinesterase target. Brain Struct Funct 218: 59–72 · DOI
  61. Shi Z, Chen T, Yao Q, Zheng L, Zhang Z, Wang J, Hu Z, Cui H, Han Y, Han X et al (2017) The circular RNA ciRS‐7 promotes APP and BACE1 degradation in an NF‐kappaB‐dependent manner. FEBS J 284: 1096–1109 · DOI
  62. Shishkin AA, Giannoukos G, Kucukural A, Ciulla D, Busby M, Surka C, Chen J, Bhattacharyya RP, Rudy RF, Patel MM et al. (2015) Simultaneous generation of many RNA‐seq libraries in a single reaction. Nat Methods 12: 323‐325 · DOI
  63. Siede D, Rapti K, Gorska AA, Katus HA, Altmuller J, Boeckel JN, Meder B, Maack C, Volkers M, Muller OJ et al (2017) Identification of circular RNAs with host gene‐independent expression in human model systems for cardiac differentiation and disease. J Mol Cell Cardiol 109: 48–56 · DOI
  64. Simchovitz A, Hanan M, Niederhoffer N, Madrer N, Yayon N, Bennett ER, Greenberg DS, Kadener S, Soreq H (2019) NEAT1 is overexpressed in Parkinson's disease substantia nigra and confers drug‐inducible neuroprotection from oxidative stress. FASEB J 33: 11223–11234 · DOI
  65. Simchovitz A, Hanan M, Yayon N, Lee S, Bennett ER, Greenberg DS, Kadener S, Soreq H (2020) A lncRNA survey finds increases in neuroprotective LINC‐PINT in Parkinson's disease substantia nigra. Aging Cell 19: e13115 · DOI
  66. Simunovic F, Yi M, Wang Y, Macey L, Brown LT, Krichevsky AM, Andersen SL, Stephens RM, Benes FM, Sonntag KC (2009) Gene expression profiling of substantia nigra dopamine neurons: further insights into Parkinson's disease pathology. Brain 132: 1795–1809 · DOI
  67. Singh M (2012) Dysregulated A to I RNA editing and non‐coding RNAs in neurodegeneration. Front Genet 3: 326 · DOI
  68. Sirabella R, Sisalli MJ, Costa G, Omura K, Ianniello G, Pinna A, Morelli M, Di Renzo GM, Annunziato L, Scorziello A (2018) NCX1 and NCX3 as potential factors contributing to neurodegeneration and neuroinflammation in the A53T transgenic mouse model of Parkinson's Disease. Cell Death Dis 9: 725 · DOI
  69. Soreq L, Israel Z, Bergman H, Soreq H (2008) Advanced microarray analysis highlights modified neuro‐immune signaling in nucleated blood cells from Parkinson's disease patients. J Neuroimmunol 201–202: 227–236 · DOI
  70. Soreq L, Bergman H, Israel Z, Soreq H (2012) Exon arrays reveal alternative splicing aberrations in Parkinson's disease leukocytes. Neurodegener Dis 10: 203–206 · DOI
  71. Soreq L, Guffanti A, Salomonis N, Simchovitz A, Israel Z, Bergman H, Soreq H (2014) Long non‐coding RNA and alternative splicing modulations in Parkinson's leukocytes identified by RNA sequencing. PLoS Comput Biol 10: e1003517 · DOI
  72. Stagsted LV, Nielsen KM, Daugaard I, Hansen TB (2019) Noncoding AUG circRNAs constitute an abundant and conserved subclass of circles. Life Sci Alliance 2: e201900398 · DOI
  73. Veno MT, Hansen TB, Veno ST, Clausen BH, Grebing M, Finsen B, Holm IE, Kjems J (2015) Spatio‐temporal regulation of circular RNA expression during porcine embryonic brain development. Genome Biol 16: 245 · DOI
  74. Westholm JO, Miura P, Olson S, Shenker S, Joseph B, Sanfilippo P, Celniker SE, Graveley BR, Lai EC (2014) Genome‐wide analysis of Drosophila circular RNAs reveals their structural and sequence properties and age‐dependent neural accumulation. Cell Rep 9: 1966–1980 · DOI
  75. Wu PC, Kao LS (2016) Calcium regulation in mouse mesencephalic neurons‐Differential roles of Na(+)/Ca(2+) exchanger, mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum. Cell Calcium 59: 299–311 · DOI
  76. Yan J, Qiao L, Wu J, Fan H, Sun J, Zhang Y (2018) Simvastatin protects dopaminergic neurons against MPP+‐induced oxidative stress and regulates the endogenous anti‐oxidant system through ERK. Cell Physiol Biochem 51: 1957–1968 · DOI
  77. Yang D, Li T, Wang Y, Tang Y, Cui H, Tang Y, Zhang X, Chen D, Shen N, Le W (2012) miR‐132 regulates the differentiation of dopamine neurons by directly targeting Nurr1 expression. J Cell Sci 125: 1673–1682
  78. Yang Y, Fan X, Mao M, Song X, Wu P, Zhang Y, Jin Y, Yang Y, Chen LL, Wang Y et al (2017) Extensive translation of circular RNAs driven by N(6)‐methyladenosine. Cell Res 27: 626–641 · DOI · Paper page
  79. You X, Vlatkovic I, Babic A, Will T, Epstein I, Tushev G, Akbalik G, Wang M, Glock C, Quedenau C et al (2015) Neural circular RNAs are derived from synaptic genes and regulated by development and plasticity. Nat Neurosci 18: 603–610 · DOI · Paper page
  80. Zhang Y, James M, Middleton FA, Davis RL (2005) Transcriptional analysis of multiple brain regions in Parkinson's disease supports the involvement of specific protein processing, energy metabolism, and signaling pathways, and suggests novel disease mechanisms. Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet 137B: 5–16 · DOI
  81. Zhang C, Darnell RB (2011) Mapping in vivo protein‐RNA interactions at single‐nucleotide resolution from HITS‐CLIP data. Nat Biotechnol 29: 607–614 · DOI
  82. Zhang Z, Yang T, Xiao J (2018) Circular RNAs: promising biomarkers for human diseases. EBioMedicine 34: 267–274 · DOI
  83. Zhou L, Yang L, Li YJ, Mei R, Yu HL, Gong Y, Du MY, Wang F (2018) MicroRNA‐128 protects dopamine neurons from apoptosis and upregulates the expression of excitatory amino acid transporter 4 in parkinson's disease by binding to AXIN1. Cell Physiol Biochem 51: 2275–2289 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Hanan, M., Simchovitz, A., Yayon, N., Vaknine, S., Cohen‐Fultheim, R., Karmon, M., Madrer, N., Rohrlich, T. M., Maman, M., Bennett, E. R., Greenberg, D. S., Meshorer, E., Levanon, E. Y., Soreq, H., & Kadener, S.
ORCID
Venue
EMBO Molecular Medicine
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2020-07-26
Volume
12
Issue
9
ISSN
  • 1757-4676
  • 1757-4684
DOI
10.15252/emmm.201911942
PMC
PMC7507321
Cited by
130
References
17
Language
en
Update notices
Licence
Funders
  • Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research (MJFF11183)
  • The Netherlands Brain Bank
  • Israeli Ministry of Science, Technology and Space (53140)
  • Edmond and Lily Safra Center of Brain Sciences
  • National Institutes of Health (R01AG057700)

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