High Polymorphism Levels of De Novo ORFs in a Yoruba Human Population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During evolution, new open reading frames (ORFs) with the potential to give rise to novel proteins continuously emerge. A recent compilation of noncanonical ORFs with translation signatures in humans has identified thousands of cases with a putative de novo origin. However, it is not known which is their distribution in the population. Are they universally translated? Here, we use ribosome profiling data from 65 lymphoblastoid cell lines from individuals of Yoruba origin to investigate this question. We identify 2,587 de novo ORFs translated in at least one of the cell lines. In line with their de novo origin, the encoded proteins tend to be smaller than 100 amino acids and encode positively charged proteins. We observe that the de novo ORFs are more polymorphic in the population than the set of canonical proteins, with a substantial fraction of them being translated in only some of the cell lines. Remarkably, this difference remains significant after controlling for differences in the translation levels. These results suggest that variations in the level translation of de novo ORFs could be a relevant source of intraspecies phenotypic diversity in humans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".