4.8 Article

Sensitive measurement of single-nucleotide polymorphism-induced changes of RNA conformation: application to disease studies

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 41, 期 1, 页码 44-53

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gks1009

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine and National Cancer Institute
  2. Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research FDA
  3. NSERC PDF
  4. National Institutes of Health, National Library of Medicine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are often linked to critical phenotypes such as diseases or responses to vaccines, medications and environmental factors. However, the specific molecular mechanisms by which a causal SNP acts is usually not obvious. Changes in RNA secondary structure emerge as a possible explanation necessitating the development of methods to measure the impact of single-nucleotide variation on RNA structure. Despite the recognition of the importance of considering the changes in Boltzmann ensemble of RNA conformers in this context, a formal method to perform directly such comparison was lacking. Here, we solved this problem and designed an efficient method to compute the relative entropy between the Boltzmann ensembles of the native and a mutant structure. On the basis of this theoretical progress, we developed a software tool, remuRNA, and investigated examples of its application. Comparing the impact of common SNPs naturally occurring in populations with the impact of random point mutations, we found that structural changes introduced by common SNPs are smaller than those introduced by random point mutations. This suggests a natural selection against mutations that significantly change RNA structure and demonstrates, surprisingly, that randomly inserted point mutations provide inadequate estimation of random mutations effects. Subsequently, we applied remuRNA to determine which of the disease-associated non-coding SNPs are potentially related to RNA structural changes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据