Back

Animal complexity defines the functionality of synonymous mutations through mediating microRNA regulations

Cui, C.; Lin, X.; Cui, Q.

2022-09-01 bioinformatics
10.1101/2022.08.30.505799 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Most recently, Shen et al. revealed that most synonymous mutations (SMs) in yeast genes are strongly non-neutral, however, which was soon challenged by Kruglyak et al. who find no evidence for deleterious effect on fitness of SMs in yeast genes. We previously revealed that SMs in numerous human genes show functionality through changing miRNA regulations. Given that higher animals show higher complexity of miRNA regulations, here we present a hypothesis that SMs in lower animal genes show less functionality and vice versa. To confirm this, we comprehensively investigated the SMs changing miRNA regulations in yeast, C.elegans, Drosophila, mouse, and human. As expected, the result showed that the proportion of SMs affecting gene functionality through altering miRNA regulations is about 0%, 14%, 16%, 51%, and 60% in yeast, C. elegans, Drosophila, mouse, and human, respectively, suggesting that the complexity of animals indeed determines the functionality of SMs through mediating miRNA regulations. Finally, this study supports no evidence that most SMs in yeast genes are deleterious.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
○ 3612 papers in training set
Top 2%
13.0%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications
○ 84 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
9.7%
Similar papers in this journal
3
PeerJ
◐ 308 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
6.3%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Frontiers in Genetics
○ 230 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
5.5%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Genomics, Proteomics & Bioinformatics
188 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.5%
6
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
● 242 papers in training set
Top 1%
4.0%
Similar papers in this journal
7
Cell Cycle
○ 17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.4%
8
BMC Bioinformatics
○ 457 papers in training set
Top 3%
3.3%
9
Biosystems
○ 31 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
10
Genes
○ 144 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.2%
11
F1000Research
○ 88 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.4%
12
RNA Biology
○ 78 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
2.1%
13
PLOS Computational Biology
● 1863 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.7%
14
Gene
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
15
Computational Biology and Chemistry
○ 28 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
16
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
○ 494 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.7%
17
Briefings in Bioinformatics
◐ 354 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.5%
18
Genomics
○ 64 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.4%
19
Journal of Molecular Evolution
○ 22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
20
Life
○ 29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
21
Heliyon
○ 152 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
22
Journal of Genetics and Genomics
○ 38 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.1%
23
iScience
○ 1154 papers in training set
Top 35%
0.8%
24
Bioinformatics
◐ 1204 papers in training set
Top 9%
0.8%
25
Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics
○ 88 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
26
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 58%
0.8%
27
Bioscience Reports
● 27 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
28
International Journal of Biological Macromolecules
○ 76 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
29
Human Mutation
○ 34 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.6%
30
Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports
○ 30 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.