scholarly journals Nucleotide sequence of a human gene for glutathione peroxidase

1987 ◽  
Vol 15 (23) ◽  
pp. 10051-10051 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koichi Ishida ◽  
Tomio Morino ◽  
Kenkichi Takagi ◽  
Yoshikazu Sukenaga
Gene ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haider Mehdi ◽  
Michael Nunn ◽  
Diana M. Steel ◽  
Alexander S. Whitehead ◽  
Mary Perez ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Byrne ◽  
Yasunori Park ◽  
Rachael A. West ◽  
Amanda Capes-Davis ◽  
Bertrand Favier ◽  
...  

AbstractThe capacity of the scientific literature to self-correct is of vital importance, but few studies have compared post-publication journal responses to specific error types. We have compared journal responses to a specific reagent error in 31 human gene knockdown publications, namely a non-targeting or negative control nucleotide sequence that is instead predicted to target a human gene. The 31 papers published by 13 biomedical journals generated 26 published responses (14 retractions, 5 expressions of concern, 7 author corrections which included one resolved expression of concern) as well as 6 stated decisions to take no action. Variations in published responses were noted both between journals and by 4 journals that published different responses to at least 2 papers. A subset of published responses revealed conflicting explanations for the wrongly identified control reagent, despite 30/31 papers obtaining their gene knockdown reagents from the same external supplier. Viewed collectively, different journal responses to human gene knockdown publications with a common reagent error type suggest that editorial staff require more support to interpret post-publication notifications of incorrect nucleotide sequence reagents. We propose a draft template to facilitate the communication, interpretation and investigation of published errors, including errors affecting research reagents.


2022 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. e202101203
Author(s):  
Yasunori Park ◽  
Rachael A West ◽  
Pranujan Pathmendra ◽  
Bertrand Favier ◽  
Thomas Stoeger ◽  
...  

Nucleotide sequence reagents underpin molecular techniques that have been applied across hundreds of thousands of publications. We have previously reported wrongly identified nucleotide sequence reagents in human research publications and described a semi-automated screening tool Seek & Blastn to fact-check their claimed status. We applied Seek & Blastn to screen >11,700 publications across five literature corpora, including all original publications in Gene from 2007 to 2018 and all original open-access publications in Oncology Reports from 2014 to 2018. After manually checking Seek & Blastn outputs for >3,400 human research articles, we identified 712 articles across 78 journals that described at least one wrongly identified nucleotide sequence. Verifying the claimed identities of >13,700 sequences highlighted 1,535 wrongly identified sequences, most of which were claimed targeting reagents for the analysis of 365 human protein-coding genes and 120 non-coding RNAs. The 712 problematic articles have received >17,000 citations, including citations by human clinical trials. Given our estimate that approximately one-quarter of problematic articles may misinform the future development of human therapies, urgent measures are required to address unreliable gene research articles.


1996 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 575-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
B Przybojewska ◽  
G Płucienniczak

The c-H-ras-1 gene of an B6C3F1 mouse was isolated and nucleotide sequence determined. Our study has revealed that this c-H-ras-1 gene consists of four exons, separated by three introns ranging in size from 150 to 649 bp. The coding parts of the sequence of mouse c-H-ras-1 gene show no important differences as compared with those of the rat, hamster and human gene. More numerous changes were found in introns. The identity of mouse c-H-ras-1 gene with rat, hamster and human ones at the nucleotide level is 86.40%, 80.04% and 67.87%, respectively. Comparison of amino acids in protein sequence of c-H-ras gene of mouse, rat, hamster and human points to high degree of conservation of the gene.


1989 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 2136-2136 ◽  
Author(s):  
Masami Akasaka ◽  
Junzo Mizoguch ◽  
Shinichi Yoshimura ◽  
Keiichi Watanabe

Gene ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 186 (2) ◽  
pp. 285-292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Koji Nata ◽  
Toshinari Takamura ◽  
Tadahiro Karasawa ◽  
Tomoko Kumagai ◽  
Wataru Hashioka ◽  
...  

1988 ◽  
Vol 16 (11) ◽  
pp. 5207-5207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ye-Shih Ho ◽  
Adriann J. Howard ◽  
James D. Crapo

1987 ◽  
Vol 15 (17) ◽  
pp. 7179-7180 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyoto Kubo ◽  
Shigeo Ohno ◽  
Koichi Suzuki

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamed Babaee

Abstract BackgroundThe coronavirus disease pandemic began in 2019 in Wuhan, China, and continues into 2021, as new mutant viruses appear and require new solutions and treatments. Methods and ResultsIn this study, by genetic analysis of data from 24 SARS-CoV-2 samples from different countries and their alignment with each other and the Wuhan reference virus as well as the human genome, the disease factor is looked at from another angle. The result is the identification of genetic differences in viruses, and the finding of a unique 17-nucleotide sequence between human genes, viruses, and enzymes that can contribute to the onset and progression of the disease. ConclusionsThe role of this sequence in DNA replication and the production of new proteins and its alignment with the EPPK1 gene that may cause disease and its various symptoms are likely.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document