Skip to main content

Table 6 The effects of exonization on mouse protein coding regions

From: Comparative analysis of transposed element insertion within human and mouse genomes reveals Alu's unique role in shaping the human transcriptome

RE

Alt. CDS

CDS

UTR

Stop

Frameshift

Functional

B1

4 (3%)

87 (65%)

43 (32%)

67 (77%)

13 (15%)

7 (8%)

MIR

3 (11%)

9 (33%)

15 (56%)

5 (55%)

0 (0%)

4 (45%)

B2

4 (5%)

37 (46%)

40 (49%)

29 (78%)

3 (8%)

5 (14%)

B4

3 (5%)

39 (63%)

20 (32%)

30 (77%)

5 (13%)

4 (10%)

L1

3 (3%)

54 (53%)

45 (44%)

38 (70%)

6 (11%)

10 (19%)

L2

0 (0%)

3 (33%)

6 (66%)

1 (33%)

1 (33%)

1 (33%)

LTR

3 (4%)

38 (53%)

31 (43%)

29 (76%)

6 (16%)

3 (8%)

DNA

1 (1%)

4 (36%)

6 (67%)

3 (75%)

0 (0%)

1 (25%)

  1. The first column shows the different examined transposed elements (TEs). Columns 2, 3, and 4 show the positions of TE exonization within the mRNA: creating an alternative coding sequence (CDS) start (Alt. CDS), exonization within the CDS, or exonization within the untranslated region (UTR). In parentheses, the relative percentages are given. Columns 5, 6, and 7 show the effect of exonization within the CDS: exonizations that contain an in-frame stop codon (within the exon); exonizations that create a frameshift in the CDS but do not contain an in-frame stop codon; and functional exonizations (exons that do not possess an in-frame stop codon and do not cause frameshifts). The relative percentages within CDS are indicated in parentheses. The total number of TEs (100%) is found at the foot of the second column of Table 2. LTR, long terminal repeat; MIR, mammalian interspersed repeat; RE, retroelement.