English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

There are two strong and equally important predictors of rates of human protein evolution: The amount the gene is expressed and the proportion of exonic sequence devoted to control splicing, mediated largely by selection on exonic splice enhancer (ESE) motifs. Is the same true for noncoding RNAs, known to be under very weak purifying selection? Prior evidence suggests that selection at splice sites in long intergenic noncoding RNAs (lincRNAs) is important. We now report multiple lines of evidence indicating that the great majority of purifying selection operating on lincRNAs in humans is splice related. Splice-related parameters explain much of the between-gene variation in evolutionary rate in humans. Expression rate is not a relevant predictor, although expression breadth is weakly so. In contrast to protein-coding RNAs, we observe no relationship between evolutionary rate and lincRNA stability. As in protein-coding genes, ESEs are especially abundant near splice junctions and evolve slower than non-ESE sequence equidistant from boundaries. Nearly all constraint in lincRNAs is at exon ends (N.B. the same is not witnessed in Drosophila). Although we cannot definitely answer the question as to why splice-related selection is so important, we find no evidence that splicing might enable the nonsense-mediated decay pathway to capture transcripts incorrectly processed by ribosomes. We find evidence consistent with the notion that splicing modifies the underlying chromatin through recruitment of splice-coupled chromatin modifiers, such as CHD1, which in turn might modulate neighbor gene activity. We conclude that most selection on human lincRNAs is splice mediated and suggest that the possibility of splice-chromatin coupling is worthy of further scrutiny.

Purifying Selection on Splice-Related Motifs, Not Expression Level nor RNA Folding, Explains Nearly All Constraint on Human lincRNAs