Exact(3)
A bioinformatic comparison (Figure 9) showed that higher levels of LEDGF/p75 expression correlated with higher frequencies of integration in transcription units.
The observed frequencies of integration into known cancer genes are significantly higher in the tumor samples than expected by chance (chi-square test P<0.002 and P<0.02 when comparing representation in Cancer Census List and RTCGD, respectively).
Chi-square tests of the observed and expected frequencies of integration events in a double transgenic Tg(T2/OncZ, ß-actin:RFP is6 ; Tg(Tol2<ß-actin:SB11, cmlc2 GFP> is8fish (sample 5C) indicate the distribution of transposon integrations sites was significantly different than expected (two tailed P<0.0001).
Similar(57)
Assuming that transposons should re-integrate randomly across the genome, we calculated the expected frequency of integration events for each chromosome based on what proportion of the genome each chromosome represents in Mb.
What are other drivers of speed and of the frequency of integration choices?
As seen above for EIAV, the frequency of integration near a variety of features was not detectably altered.
The frequency of integration within 5 kb of RefSeq gene 5' ends showed a similar pattern (Table 3).
Nevertheless, the frequency of integration was at least 3 orders of magnitude below the spontaneous rate of gene-inactivating mutations [13].
We took advantage of the observation that different cell types differ reproducibly in their frequency of integration in transcription units [40] to investigate this question.
In addition, we carried out a bioinformatic study of 15 HIV integration site data sets in different cell types, which showed that the frequency of integration in transcription units was correlated with the cell-type specific levels of PSIP1/LEDGF/p75 expression.
We therefore analyzed the frequency of integration in regions of varying G/C content (Figure 8C), revealing that integration was significantly increased in more G/C rich regions in the −/− MEFs (P = 4e-16).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com