At least a third of the human genome is comprised of repetitive sequences (de Koning et al., 2011; Gemmell, 2021; Britten and Kohne, 1968). Some of the first genomic repetitive elements were discovered in association with disease. As a result, pathogenic roles of repeats were well studied, while potential native functions of these repeats were largely dismissed. However, the conservation of genomic repeats among different eukaryotic species (Eichler et al., 1995; Sulovari et al., 2019; Liquori et al., 2003) and their high polymorphism rates compared to other types of genetic variations (Willems et al., 2016) suggests that repeats may have important biological functions in addition to the pathogenic ones. A growing body of research has revealed complex biological and evolutionary functions for repeats across the genome. Here, we summarize the important functions of one type of genomic repeat, short (2–6 base pair) tandem repeats (STRs), in DNA, RNA, and as proteins. We then reframe STR toxicity observed in repeat expansion disorders (REDs) as an aberrancy of native STR functions, rather than as solely a emergent property disconnected from the native repeat. Finally, we discuss how this alternative view of STR toxicity can improve our understanding of roles of STRs in neuronal function and human health.

Native STR functions

While overshadowed by disease-centered research, scientists have investigated functional consequences of repeat polymorphisms for decades. Studies of individual or small groups of genes showed phenotypic consequences of repeat length variation on flocculation and cell adhesion in yeast (Voynov et al., 2006; Levdansky et al., 2007; Verstrepen et al., 2005), limb and skull morphology in dogs (Fondon and Garner, 2004) and on behavioral traits in voles (Hammock and Young, 2005). Recent advances in sequencing technology and STR-conscious alignment techniques now permit the detection and characterization of thousands of new STRs and their variation across the human genome, and have enabled genome-wide study of the effect of repeat length polymorphisms on gene expression (Willems et al., 2016; Payseur et al., 2011; McIver et al., 2011; O’Dushlaine and Shields, 2008; McIver et al., 2013; Willems et al., 2014; Mallick et al., 2016). As thousands of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have been linked with disease risk in Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS; Tam et al., 2019; Uffelmann et al., 2021), ongoing studies of human genomes aim to link variation in STR length to phenotypic outcomes (Gymrek et al., 2016; Fotsing et al., 2019; Mitra et al., 2021). In homage to the expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) identified in traditional GWAS (Tam et al., 2019; Uffelmann et al., 2021), STRs associated with differences in expression of nearby genes are called eSTRs. In the following sections, we will first discuss evidence for evolutionary constraint on STRs linked to evolution across phylogeny and in humans. We will then showcase the mechanisms by which variation in STR length affects gene expression.

Repetitive DNA regulates transcription

Repetitive elements can impact the transcription of neighboring genes or the genes in which they reside by regulating chromatin structure and epigenetic markers. A role for repetitive DNA in facilitating 3D folding of the genome was first observed with TE-dependent formation of chromatin loops across multiple species, including yeast, Drosophila, and mammals (Figure 1(i); Cournac et al., 2016; Bourque, 2009; Lu et al., 2021). Contact maps generated using chromosome conformation capture (Hi-C) show high co-localization of repetitive elements in nuclear space in humans, mice, and Drosophila, demonstrating a structural function of repetitive DNA (Cournac et al., 2016). The enrichment of transcription factor binding sites in proximity to spatially associated repeats suggests that repeat-mediated 3D DNA packaging may allow for context-dependent co-transcription of linearly remote genes (Cournac et al., 2016).

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

STRs play critical roles in maintaining chromatin structure (Nikumbh and Pfeifer, 2017; Sun et al., 2018; Volle and Delaney, 2012). For example, short CAG/CTG tracts avidly incorporate nucleosomes (Figure 1 (ii)), which are a basic subunit of chromatin packaging (Volle and Delaney, 2012). Nucleosome position varies with differences in STR length and flanking sequence context (Volle and Delaney, 2012), influencing chromatin structure and transcription of nearby genes. Other STRs, including CGG repeats, have the opposite effect and exclude nucleosomes in their native states, creating more open chromatin states near the transcription start sites of genes that favor local transcription (Wang et al., 1996; Wang, 2007). This feature may underlie the enrichment of CGG repeats in promoters and 5’UTRs (Uesaka et al., 2014).

STRs can also influence chromatin structure by modulating DNA methylation. Some STRs are prone to methylation, which can lead to gene silencing and the absence of transcription (Quilez et al., 2016; Garg et al., 2021; Pappalardo and Barra, 2021). One common example of repeat-mediated gene silencing, CpG islands are repeating di-nucleotide CpG sequences ranging from around 500–3000 base pairs and are located in ~40% of gene promoters across mammalian genomes (Deaton and Bird, 2011; Janitz and Janitz, 2011; Thomson et al., 2010; Clouaire et al., 2012; Blackledge et al., 2013). STRs are commonly located near CpG islands (Sun et al., 2018), and may influence their methylation states (Figure 1 (iii)). Moreover, other STRs can contain CpGs within their repetitive sequence that can undergo methylation (Bolton et al., 2013).

A genome-wide study in yeast (Vinces et al., 2009) estimates as many as 25% of promoters contain tandem repeats (TRs). Generally, expression of genes with TRs in their promoters increased with increasing repeat size. TRs in promoters may increase gene expression by increasing transcription factor binding (Figure 1 (iv)), blocking or reducing nucleosome density, or in the case of AT-rich repeats, by facilitating DNA melting (Vinces et al., 2009). However, stable secondary structures formed by TRs can also inhibit transcription by impeding procession and access of transcriptional machinery (Figure 1 (v); Grabczyk and Fishman, 1995; Belotserkovskii et al., 2010; Usdin and Woodford, 1995). For example, the evolutionarily conserved THO complex is recruited to actively transcribed genes (Kim et al., 2004; Abruzzi et al., 2004; Strässer et al., 2002), and facilitates elongation of RNA polymerase (Fan et al., 1996; Prado et al., 1997; Fan et al., 2001; Jimeno et al., 2002; Chávez et al., 2000) through super-helical structures formed by long GC-rich TRs (Voynov et al., 2006; Chávez et al., 2001). Yeast strains with mutations to THO complex subunits exhibited lower levels of TR-containing FLO11 mRNA. Reduced FLO11 mRNA coincided with an accumulation of RNA polymerase at the beginning of the gene. Removal of the TR or overexpression of topoisomerase I to enhance unwinding of the structured DNA, rescued the reduction in FLO11 mRNA in THO complex mutants (Voynov et al., 2006).

As in yeast, human STRs can either enhance and inhibit transcription of associated genes dependent on their sequence and locations, and also affect gene expression via changes in gene methylation and chromatin structure (Gymrek et al., 2016; Fotsing et al., 2019; Quilez et al., 2016; Garg et al., 2021; Jakubosky et al., 2020). Together, these studies demonstrate numerous mechanisms by which TRs can enhance or inhibit gene expression.

STRs in RNA regulate pre-mRNA processing and RNA localization

Transcribed repetitive elements regulate numerous aspects of RNA biology. STRs in RNAs form complex higher order structures, including G-quadruplexes and hairpins (Krzyzosiak et al., 2012; Sobczak et al., 2003; Malgowska et al., 2014; Sobczak et al., 2010), which are thought to exert broad influence over pre-mRNA splicing (Figure 1 (vi)) (Muro et al., 1999; Tu et al., 2000; Black, 2003; Solnick and Lee, 1987). An analysis of human introns found that sites of alternative splicing are enriched for STRs (Lian and Garner, 2005). STRs can facilitate alternative splicing by complementary pairing of intronic repeats, bringing exonic regions into close proximity (Lian and Garner, 2005). Structure-forming STRs can inhibit or enhance alternative splicing by blocking or facilitating the recruitment of splicing factors, respectively (Lian and Garner, 2005). For example, alternative splicing of the EIIIB exon in the well-conserved fibronectin gene is regulated by an intronic TGCATG repeat (Huh and Hynes, 1994; Lim and Sharp, 1998). Contractions in this STR reduce EIIIB exon inclusion, while overexpression of a specific splicing factor, SRp40, stimulates inclusion. While the TGCATG repeat differs from SRp40’s consensus binding site, it can form a strong hairpin structure, which is a key feature of SRp40 binding site motifs (Tacke et al., 1997). This suggests that the TGCATG repeat may modulate alternative splicing by recruiting the SRp40 splicing factor to the intron/exon boundary (Lim and Sharp, 1998).

Some STRs in RNA regulate splicing in trans, by binding to and sequestering splicing factors and blocking their functions (Figure 1 (vii)). A recent study identified a group of novel long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) with multiple predicted RNA binding motifs (Yap et al., 2018), a subset of which contained long stretches of STRs (‘strRNAs’). One strRNA called the pyrimidine-rich noncoding transcript (PNCTR) contains numerous stretches of (TC)_n repeats, avidly binds to the polypyrimidine tract-binding protein (PTBP1) in cells, and negatively regulates PTBP1-mediated splicing (Yap et al., 2018). As such, PNCTR overexpression was sufficient to trigger mis-splicing of PTBP1 targets and trigger programmed cell death (Yap et al., 2018). In this way, STRs in RNA can regulate the global availability of other RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) with other functions, exerting profound control over numerous aspects of cell biology.

STRs in 3’ UTRs can also serve as RNA localization signals, and via interactions with RBPs, facilitate the transport of RNAs to specified cellular compartments (Figure 1 (viii)). A program called REPFIND was developed to analyze 3’ UTRs of localized mRNAs in Xenopus oocytes and identified various CAC-containing repeat motifs that serve as localization elements (Betley et al., 2002). Mutating these CAC-containing repeats was sufficient to abolish normal RNA localization. CAC-containing repeats were also found in zebrafish and human 3’ UTRs of transcripts that are known to be specifically localized within cells, suggesting that CAC-containing repeats are conserved localization elements in chordates (Betley et al., 2002). REPFIND was subsequently used to generate a database of repeating motifs in 3’ UTRs of mammalian genes from the Mammalian Gene Collection (MGC) that revealed hundreds of human genes containing short CAC- and CAG-rich repeats in their 3’ UTRs (Lim and Sharp, 1998). Intriguingly, these elements facilitate RNA localization to neurites in rat hippocampal neurons (Andken et al., 2007).

Repetitive RNA regulates translation

STRs located in 5’ UTRs and coding regions impact mRNA translational efficiency. GC-rich STRs form stable RNA structures (Krzyzosiak et al., 2012; Sobczak et al., 2003; Malgowska et al., 2014; Sobczak et al., 2010), which can impede the processivity of scanning translational complexes (Figure 1 (ix)) (Kozak, 1980; Kozak, 1986; Kudla et al., 2009; Tuller et al., 2011; Ding et al., 2012; Bentele et al., 2013; Weinberg et al., 2016). For example, a native GGN repeat in the 5’ UTR of the potassium 2-pore domain leak channel Task3 mRNA forms a G-quadruplex structure in vivo (Maltby et al., 2020). This G-quadruplex is inhibitory to translation of Task3 mRNA, but can be overcome by DHX36 helicase activity to improve ribosome processivity through the stable structure (Maltby et al., 2020).

Indeed, libraries of synthetic (Millette et al., 2022) and naturally occurring (Li et al., 2017; Niederer et al., 2022) hairpin sequences placed within 5’ UTRs can be used to precisely control translational transgene output, with potential implications for gene therapy dosing. These studies show how single unit variations in STRs can precisely modulate protein expression, generally permitting more and faster translation of mRNAs with smaller STRs, and less and slower translation of mRNAs with larger STRs.

Repeats in proteins facilitate multi-protein complex formation and structural flexibility

Eukaryotic proteins are more likely to have repeats than prokaryotic proteins, and proteins containing repeats are often unique to eukaryotes and eukaryotic functions (Marcotte et al., 1999). There are numerous long repeating motifs in proteins (>20 amino acids/repeat) with loose homology between repeats, that form complex tertiary structures (Andrade et al., 2001). These protein repeat domains are characterized by the structures they form, as all-β (i.e. β-propellers, β-trefoils), all-α (i.e. HEAT and tetratricopeptide repeats (TPRs)), or mixed α/β (i.e. leucine-rich repeats, ankyrin repeat; Andrade et al., 2001). Although their specific functions vary, protein repeat domains typically serve as binding sites, and are thought to have evolved in eukaryotes to aide in the formation of multi-protein complexes with advanced cellular functions (Andrade et al., 2001; Kajava, 2012; Sharma and Pandey, 2015).

STRs translated into proteins, are thought to have similar functions as these larger repeat-based protein domains, serving as sites for protein-protein interactions (Figure 1 (x); Schaefer et al., 2012; Faux, 2012). CAG repeats are enriched in coding regions and are most frequently found in the polyglutamine (polyQ) reading frame, suggesting that polyQ stretches in proteins have a native function (Schaefer et al., 2012). PolyQ stretches are enriched in proteins that are components of multi-protein complexes, and have functions in transcriptional control, phosphatidylinositol (PI) signaling, protein degradation, and chromatin remodeling. Evolutionary sequence comparison reveals that the location of polyQs within a protein is not always conserved (Schaefer et al., 2012). This suggests that polyQ stretches have evolved multiple times, and don’t directly confer a protein’s function, but rather modulate the protein-protein interactions necessary for those functions (Schaefer et al., 2012; Orr, 2012). Other CG-containing STRs (i.e. CUGs and CGGs) show similar patterns of overrepresentation in coding regions (Schaefer et al., 2012), and likely serve similar complex-scaffolding functions (Nasrallah et al., 2012).

STRs when translated into proteins can be critical for proper protein folding. For example, translation of a CAG repeat in the huntingtin gene (HTT) produces a polyQ tract in the HTT protein which serves as a flexible hinge, allowing the neighboring domains to fold into close proximity (Figure 1 (xi)) (Caron et al., 2013). HTT protein structure is altered with repeat expansion, demonstrating the importance of the flexibility conferred by this STR (Caron et al., 2013).

Pathogenic consequences of STRs: A Fragile X case study

In the previous section, we summarized how STRs in DNA, RNA, and when translated into proteins can affect gene expression and protein function. In the following section, we will draw parallels from these native functions of STRs to pathogenic mechanisms in REDs (Figure 2). These parallels demonstrate how STR toxicity can be viewed as aberrancies of native processes, rather than emergent dysfunctions. For this analysis, we will largely use the Fragile X locus discussed earlier as a well-characterized case study, although many of these principles also apply to other REDs and a few specific examples are included here (reviewed in broader detail in Malik et al., 2021a; Glineburg et al., 2018; Paulson, 2018; Rodriguez and Todd, 2019).

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Epigenetic and transcriptional dysfunction of STRs in DNA

The functional consequences of STRs on genome organization and transcription are evident when dysfunction is observed in REDs (Dion and Wilson, 2009; López-Martínez et al., 2020; Yin et al., 2020; Usdin, 2008). Repeat expansions can alter local genome architecture and expression of neighboring genes. A prime example is observed at a CTG repeat in the 3’UTR of the DMPK gene associated with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1), expansion of which alters local chromatin structure and suppresses transcription of neighboring gene, Six5 (Winchester et al., 1999; Brouwer et al., 2013; López Castel et al., 2011). Repeat expansions also cause global alterations in chromatin structure. CGG repeat expansions in FXS patients cause severe disruptions in chromatin boundaries (Figure 2 (i); Sun et al., 2018). These disruptions may explain delayed DNA replication (Subramanian et al., 1996), activation of DNA replication stress pathways (Chakraborty et al., 2020) and altered local DNA replication patterns (Gerhardt et al., 2014) observed at CGG repeat expansions and the Fragile X locus in particular.

As genomic repeats influence native DNA methylation, some STRs are aberrantly methylated only upon expansion (Figure 2(ii); Otten and Tapscott, 1995; Steinbach et al., 1998; Herman et al., 2006; Greene et al., 2007; Belzil et al., 2013; Xi et al., 2013). When the CGG repeat in the 5’ UTR of FMR1 expands beyond 200 repeats, it is susceptible to DNA methylation of both the CpG elements within the repeat and at a CpG element within the FMR1 promoter (Oberlé et al., 1991; Sutcliffe et al., 1992; Pieretti et al., 1991; McConkie-Rosell et al., 1993; Hansen et al., 1992; Coffee et al., 2002; Colak et al., 2014; Willemsen et al., 2002). This hypermethylation is associated with FMR1 gene silencing, with a resulting absence of FMR1 mRNA and FMRP, a critical RBP involved in synaptic plasticity and neuronal function (Oberlé et al., 1991; Hagerman et al., 2017; Quartier et al., 2017; Myrick et al., 2014). How exactly repeat expansion triggers methylation and the relationship between expansion, methylation, and epigenetic silencing is not fully understood, but the locus remains transcriptionally active and unmethylated in human embryonic stem cells even in the presence of very large repeat expansions, with silencing occurring during differentiation. Some studies suggest that FMR1 silencing requires co-transcriptional binding of CGG repeat mRNA directly to the FMR1 promoter region as an RNA-DNA heteroduplex (Colak et al., 2014; Groh et al., 2014).

STR expansions can enhance or inhibit mRNA production from nearby genes. At FMR1, premutation range CGG repeats which cause FXTAS or FXPOI (and which are unmethylated) result in elevated transcription of FMR1 mRNA (Tassone et al., 2000a; Tassone et al., 2000b; Entezam et al., 2007; Brouwer et al., 2008; Kenneson et al., 2001). This may result from use of additional upstream transcription start sites (Beilina et al., 2004; Tassone et al., 2011), or be associated with enrichment of acetylated histones or other chromatin activating factors at the premutation allele (Todd et al., 2010). It’s possible that both hypo-expression and hyperexpression of FMR1 stems from the complex structures formed by these CGG repeats as DNA (Usdin and Woodford, 1995; Fry and Loeb, 1994; Kettani et al., 1995; Patel et al., 2000). As seen in native STRs, different structures formed by expanded STRs could facilitate or block binding of histone-modifying methylases, demethylases, acetylases, deacetylases, and even entire nucleosomes to affect downstream gene expression (Figure 2 (iii-v)) (Wang et al., 1996; Usdin and Kumari, 2015).

Repeat expansions cause defects in pre-mRNA processing and mRNA localization

The native roles of STRs in RNA in regulating splicing mirror splicing dysfunction observed in numerous REDs (Figure 2 (vi)). Splicing of the HTT huntingtin gene, which contains a CAG repeat, is altered at expanded repeats associated with Huntington’s Disease, resulting in the production of a transcript containing only exon 1 and the production of an exon 1 HTT protein (Gipson et al., 2013; Sathasivam et al., 2013; Neueder et al., 2017; Neueder et al., 2018; Franich et al., 2019). The exon 1 HTT protein is found in patient tissues and is toxic in model systems (Gipson et al., 2013; Sathasivam et al., 2013; Neueder et al., 2017; Neueder et al., 2018; Franich et al., 2019). Incomplete splicing of HTT with the CAG repeat expansion increased with overexpression and decreased with knockdown of splicing factor SRSF6. SRSF6 is predicted to bind to the 5’ end of HTT transcripts via the CAG repeat, suggesting that SRSF6-CAG repeat interactions interfere with spliceosome formation at the nearby splice site (Neueder et al., 2018).

Global splicing defects in REDs result from sequestration of critical splicing factors that bind to STR-containing RNA (López-Martínez et al., 2020; Mykowska et al., 2011; Botta et al., 2008). STRs can be binding sites for RBPs, regulating their availability throughout the cell. RNAs with longer STRs bind more RBPs, which can cause a global cellular depletion of these factors (Figure 2 (vii)) (Malik et al., 2021a; Glineburg et al., 2018; Rodriguez and Todd, 2019). In myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1), the expanded CTG repeat in the 3’ UTR of the DMPK gene (López-Martínez et al., 2020; Korade-Mirnics et al., 1998; Udd and Krahe, 2012) binds to muscleblind-like splicing regulator 1 protein (MBNL1) among other RBPs (Paul et al., 2011; Jiang et al., 2004; Fardaei et al., 2001; Mankodi et al., 2001; Miller et al., 2000), resulting in depletion of critical splicing factors (Botta et al., 2008; Jiang et al., 2004; Pascual et al., 2006; Jog et al., 2012) and global splicing defects (López-Martínez et al., 2020; Paul et al., 2011; Jiang et al., 2004; Du et al., 2010; Philips et al., 1998). RBP depletion by the CTG repeat in DM1 can also impact other aspects of pre-mRNA processing, including polyadenylation (Thomas et al., 2017; Goodwin et al., 2015).

In FXTAS, premutation expansion mRNA sequesters and depletes multiple RBPs that bind to the CGG repeat RNA directly (i.e. DGCR8 Sellier et al., 2013), Purα (Jin et al., 2007), hnRNP A2/B1 (Jin et al., 2007; Iwahashi et al., 2006; Muslimov et al., 2011; Sofola et al., 2007) or indirectly via binding to CGG-bound proteins (i.e. Drosha Sellier et al., 2013 and Sam68 Sellier et al., 2010). These RBPs are involved in a variety of functions that are affected by their sequestration, including miRNA processing (DGCR8, Drosha), mRNA transport (hnRNP A2/B1, Purα) (Figure 2 (viii)), and in splicing (hnRNP A2/B1, Sam68). Splicing defects have been observed in CGG premutation expansion models (Sellier et al., 2010; He et al., 2014), but compensatory overexpression of CGG repeat-sequestered RBPs (Jin et al., 2007; Sofola et al., 2007; He et al., 2014; Qurashi et al., 2011) or blocking RBP binding to CGG repeats (Disney et al., 2012; Verma et al., 2019; Verma et al., 2020; Verma et al., 2022) can improve these disease-associated defects. This pathogenic sequestration of RBPs by expanded repeats mirrors the native role for STRs in RNA as RBP reserves, mediating fine-tuned dosing of RBP availability with repeat length.

In addition to the depletion of RBPs and consequent defects in RNA splicing and localization and miRNA processing, expanded STRs in RNAs may also cause toxicity by self-association (gelation) (Figure 2(ix); Glineburg et al., 2018; Sellier et al., 2010; He et al., 2014; Jain and Vale, 2017; Ciesiolka et al., 2017; Fay et al., 2017; Tassone et al., 2004). Yet, these processes also occur on RNAs with shorter STRs that are below the pathological threshold for disease, suggesting such that such phase separation properties of specific RNA motifs and their associated RBPs may exist on a spectrum from physiologic to pathologic.

Expanded STRs in RNA can mis-localize or be retained in the nucleus instead of transported to its functional location in the cell (Davis et al., 1997; Mastroyiannopoulos et al., 2010; Sun et al., 2015). This may be mediated by splicing defects (Sun et al., 2015), via export-inhibiting RBP interactions (Smith et al., 2007), or via a larger dysfunction of nucleocytoplasmic transport (Zhang et al., 2015; Zhang et al., 2016; Jovičić et al., 2015; Freibaum et al., 2015; Grima et al., 2017; Gasset-Rosa et al., 2017; Sellier et al., 2017). For example, SRSF proteins bind to CGG and G4C2 repeats and appear critical to their cytoplasmic transport out of the nucleus (Malik et al., 2021b; Hautbergue et al., 2017). In this context, lowered expression of SRSF proteins or inhibition of the SRSF protein kinase SRPK1, which regulates SRSF nuclear entry, suppress CGG repeat exit to the cytoplasm and reduce toxicity in Drosophila and neuronal model systems (Malik et al., 2021b). Together, these studies show that expanded STRs in RNA can induce toxicity via RBP depletion or by direct RNA dysfunction.

Aberrant translation of expanded STRs

Scanning translational complexes are more likely to stall at stable secondary structures formed by expanded STRs (Figure 2 (x)), resulting in aberrant translation initiation upstream of or within the repeat in a process known as repeat-associated non-AUG (RAN) translation (Figure 2 (xi)). RAN translation produces toxic peptides that contribute to expanded STR toxicity and neurodegeneration in numerous REDs (Glineburg et al., 2018; Ciesiolka et al., 2017; Cleary and Ranum, 2017; Kearse and Todd, 2014; Kearse et al., 2016; Todd et al., 2013; Wojciechowska et al., 2014; Mori et al., 2013a; Ash et al., 2013; Mori et al., 2013b; Bañez-Coronel et al., 2015; Zu et al., 2011; Zu et al., 2017; Soragni et al., 2018; Ishiguro et al., 2017).

The mechanisms underlying RAN translation likely vary across different STRs and different genetic contexts (Malik et al., 2021a; Gao et al., 2017). At the CGG repeat of FMR1, RAN translation occurs in all three reading frames to produce polyarginine (FMRpolyR) (+0-frame relative to the AUG of FMR1), polyglycine (FMRpolyG) (+1-frame), and polyalanine (FMRpolyA) (+2-frame) peptides at different efficiencies (Kearse et al., 2016; Todd et al., 2013). STR-induced stalling of translation machinery is also responsible for a reduction in downstream production of the main protein produced by FMR1 translation, FMRP, in CGG premutation carriers (Tassone et al., 2000b; Kenneson et al., 2001).

Repetitive proteins have pathogenic consequences

Repeat-containing peptides, produced via canonical translation of STRs in coding regions or via RAN translation, contribute to toxicity in REDs. At CGG repeats, both FMRpolyG and FMRpolyA are present within intranuclear neuronal inclusions in patient tissues (Sellier et al., 2017; Todd et al., 2013; Buijsen et al., 2014; Krans et al., 2019; Ma et al., 2019), and are toxic in model systems (Sellier et al., 2017; Todd et al., 2013; Derbis et al., 2018; Gohel et al., 2019; Hoem et al., 2019). FMRpolyG, the most abundant CGG RAN product, is necessary for CGG repeat toxicity and inclusion formation (Sellier et al., 2017; Todd et al., 2013; Oh et al., 2015) in overexpression models. Numerous RAN or homopolymeric peptides generated in other REDs are essential for their toxicity and formation of proteinaceous inclusions (Figure 2 (xii); Yamamoto et al., 2000; Schilling et al., 1999; Ordway et al., 1997; Bäuerlein et al., 2017; Paulson et al., 1997; Mizielinska et al., 2014; May et al., 2014; Zu et al., 2013). Overall, dysfunctional aggregation of repeat derived protein products mirrors the native function of STRs in proteins as facilitators of protein-protein interactions.

Translation through large STRs that form stable secondary structures likely induces ribosome stalls and elongation errors. A growing body of work shows that disease-associated STRs undergo stall-induced translational frameshifting to produce novel chimeric polypeptides (Gaspar et al., 2000; Toulouse et al., 2005; Davies and Rubinsztein, 2006; Tabet et al., 2018; McEachin et al., 2020; Wright et al., 2022), and several of these studies have shown that these frameshift products have distinct contributions to neuronal dysfunction in disease (Tabet et al., 2018; McEachin et al., 2020; Wright et al., 2022). While there is evidence that polymeric peptides contribute to toxicity observed in REDs via aggregation, the mechanistic details of homo- and di-polymeric peptide toxicity and chimeric polypeptide toxicity remain under investigation.

Antisense transcripts contribute to REDs via multiple mechanisms

Antisense transcription from the FMR1 locus generates multiple long-noncoding asFMR1 mRNAs, with some including the repeat (Ladd et al., 2007; Khalil et al., 2008; Elizur et al., 2016; Pastori et al., 2014). One antisense transcript, FMR4, is thought to play a critical role in regulating the cell cycle and apoptosis (Khalil et al., 2008). Another antisense transcript, FMR6, is upregulated in premutation women, with increased repeat length correlating to elevated RNA levels and reduced number of oocytes, suggesting a relationship between antisense transcript expression and toxicity (Elizur et al., 2016). FMR1 antisense transcription in general is upregulated in Fragile X premutation disorders and lost in FXS, like the sense FMR1 mRNA (Ladd et al., 2007). Moreover, asFMR1 mRNAs containing the CCG repeats can undergo RAN translation, producing additional homopolymeric proteins with toxic potential (Kearse et al., 2016). STR-containing antisense transcripts likely contribute to toxicity observed in many REDs, but this is best characterized in C9ALS/FTD and SCA8, where antisense transcripts are found in toxic RNA foci and contribute to RAN peptide production (Mori et al., 2013a; Zu et al., 2011; Zu et al., 2013; Moseley et al., 2006; Gendron et al., 2013).

Conclusions and open questions

Native functions of STRs from an evolutionary perspective

Evolutionary pressures on STR copy number predict that repeat expansions will be either tolerated or selected for until an upper, deleterious limit is reached. If STRs were intrinsically deleterious, then there would be selective pressure towards repeat contractions, leading to global reductions in STR size or their selective elimination. However, several recent studies suggest that there is selective STR expansion across phylogeny, especially in primates. This is particularly true in 5’ UTRs and coding regions, where constraints on repeat expansion and contraction are greatest (Gymrek et al., 2017). At the same time, many intergenic STRs show correlations between their size and the expression of neighboring genes. These eSTRs contribute meaningfully to population variance in gene expression profiles and disease associated Quantitative trait loci (eQTLs) in human populations (Fotsing et al., 2019; Gymrek et al., 2017). In general, these eSTRs are largely unconstrained unless neighboring or embedded within a gene already under strong constraint. This mutation-selection balance suggests some inherent native functions of STRs within transcript and protein space while also implying that intrinsic STR instability may allow for more rapid variation and acquisition of traits through local perturbations in gene expression than could be accomplished through single nucleotide mutations (Figure 3A). The highly variable methylation status, mRNA and protein expression patterns elicited by differences in FMR1 CGG repeat lengths typify the potential for repeat variation within populations to influence gene expression (Figure 3B). As even subtle changes in repeat size can tune gene expression and protein function and have downstream impacts on simple and complex phenotypes, they may be an important component of the genetic differences between humans and other species, and among humans themselves.

Figure 3

Download asset Open asset

Revisiting our understanding of and approach to Repeat Expansion Disorders

Historically, repetitive elements within human genomes have been viewed as mostly unregulated ‘junk DNA’ that is not under selective evolutionary pressure. As such expansions of these repetitive elements are unfortunate accidents which become apparent and important only when they elicit highly penetrant and syndromic human diseases. Consistent with this line of reasoning, the field of REDs has largely focused on emergent toxic mechanisms as drivers of disease only in the setting of large STR expansions rather than considering their pathology as alterations in the native functions played by these repeats in their normal genomic contexts. Here, we propose re-framing the discussion around repetitive elements in general- and STRs in particular- within human genomes. For each STR, we suggest first considering whether the STRs associated with a human disease have any native functions at their ‘normal’ size. If a native function exists, then expansion of these STRs can be viewed primarily as an aberrancy of that native function with coincident predictable impacts on gene expression dysregulation above certain repeat lengths. This reframing aligns with the approach typically taken in studying gain-of-function and loss-of-function mutations in disease associated single amino acid mutations and better ties the native functions of STRs to their pathology. It also suggests that shared regulatory rules will likely apply across REDs.

This approach to thinking about REDs leads to specific predictions. First, we predict that more REDs will be discovered in the future. For example, multiple recently described REDs are linked to CGG repeats, including neuronal intranuclear inclusion disease (NIID) (Ishiura et al., 2019; Sone et al., 2019), oculopharyngodistal myopathy (OPDM) and leukodystrophy (OPML) (Ishiura et al., 2019; Deng et al., 2020; Ogasawara et al., 2020; Tian et al., 2019), adult onset leukoencephalopathy (Okubo et al., 2019), and autism/intellectual disability (Annear et al., 2022). Most of these new CGG repeatopathies reside within the 5’ UTRs, like the CGG repeat in FMR1, and there is already evidence of convergent disease mechanisms triggered by these new repeats with those already established in Fragile X disorders. In one particularly notable example, a CGG repeat expansion in NOTCH2NLC leads to the creation of an AUG-initiated upstream open reading frame in the 5’ UTR that is generates a polyglycine-containing protein akin to FMRpolyG in FMR1 (Liu et al., 2022; Boivin et al., 2021). This polyglycine protein is found within inclusions in patients with NIID and its generation is required to trigger inclusion formation and behavioral phenotypes in a mouse model of NOTCH2NLC associated NIID. As such, we know that this motif in this location within neuronally expressed genes can elicit dysfunction through predictable mechanisms. This means that we should expect other CGG repeat expansions to emerge that mirror the pathologic processes established for the FMR1 locus and now extended to a large set of loci. Similarly, given evidence that the CGG repeat in FMR1 5’UTRs can serve as a functional element that regulates transcription, mRNA localization and translation, we predict that native CGG repeat elements in these disease-associated alleles may have normal functions akin to those observed for FMR1, and as such represent a functional motif shared among many genes.

However, these new REDs may not all fit the typical model observed to date, where highly penetrant STR expansions lead to syndromic disorders. Instead, smaller changes in repeat size at multiple loci, impacting expression of the genes in which they reside or neighboring genes, will serve as risk alleles for common conditions. This risk-allele model is already apparent, as intermediate CAG repeat expansions in ATXN1, ATXN2, and HTT are associated with sporadic ALS and some other common neurodegenerative disorders (Elden et al., 2010; Rosas et al., 2020). Indeed, a fair proportion of the unexplained signal within Genome Wide association Studies (GWAS) can be explained by variations within neighboring STRs (Gymrek et al., 2016; Gymrek, 2017; Hannan, 2018). To date, numerous STR variants have been linked to ASD (Mitra et al., 2021; Trost et al., 2020) and Schizophrenia (Mojarad et al., 2022). As PCR-free and long-read whole genome data becomes more abundant and available (reviewed in Mitsuhashi and Matsumoto, 2020), it will become increasingly easy to detect these dynamic repeat size/disease relationships, creating a whole new class of STR-associated conditions that will likely expand outside of neurological conditions.

Second, we predict that long-read whole genome sequencing datasets will improve our understanding of the native roles of STRs in humans, and reveal a ubiquitous impact of repeat length variation on gene expression. Once we create accurate maps of STR variation across the genome and link this variation to neighboring gene loci expression, we will be able to better discern the mechanisms by which STRs influence gene expression across cell types. We predict that many genes whose expression is affected by neighboring repeat length variation will play critical functions in the nervous system. Most known REDs present with neurological symptoms. If REDs reflect the native functions of STRs, then the overrepresentation of neurological dysfunctions linked to STR expansions suggests that STRs may play roles relevant to neuronal health and function. It is also possible that neurons, as terminally differentiated cells, may be more prone to somatic instability, leading to repeat expansion and the emergence of associated dysfunction with age.

Finally, we predict that the native functions of STRs will inform our understanding of how STR expansions cause disease and vice versa. A deeper understanding of the native functions of both disease-associated STRs and STRs in general will reveal the pathways altered in REDs, and these pathways may be areas for therapeutic intervention that can be applicable across all REDs. By studying the mechanisms by which STRs elicit disease, we can also surmise key elements of how they might function normally within nervous systems (see examples in previous section, “Mechanisms of STR toxicity reveal novel native functions of STRs”). Ultimately, research into native functions of STRs will reveal both mechanisms by which they regulate neuronal function and therapeutic targets by which their toxicity in REDs can be mitigated.

1. 1. Abruzzi KC
   2. Lacadie S
   3. Rosbash M

   (2004) Biochemical analysis of TREX complex recruitment to intronless and intron-containing yeast genes

   The EMBO Journal 23:2620–2631.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7600261

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Allingham-Hawkins DJ
   2. Babul-Hirji R
   3. Chitayat D
   4. Holden JJ
   5. Yang KT
   6. Lee C
   7. Hudson R
   8. Gorwill H
   9. Nolin SL
   10. Glicksman A
   11. Jenkins EC
   12. Brown WT
   13. Howard-Peebles PN
   14. Becchi C
   15. Cummings E
   16. Fallon L
   17. Seitz S
   18. Black SH
   19. Vianna-Morgante AM
   20. Costa SS
   21. Otto PA
   22. Mingroni-Netto RC
   23. Murray A
   24. Webb J
   25. Vieri F

   (1999)

   Fragile X premutation is a significant risk factor for premature ovarian failure: the International collaborative POF in fragile X study -- preliminary data

   American Journal of Medical Genetics 83:322–325.

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Andken BB
   2. Lim I
   3. Benson G
   4. Vincent JJ
   5. Ferenc MT
   6. Heinrich B
   7. Jarzylo LA
   8. Man HY
   9. Deshler JO

   (2007) 3’-Utr SIRF: a database for identifying clusters of whort interspersed repeats in 3’ untranslated regions

   BMC Bioinformatics 8:274.

   https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-274

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Andrade MA
   2. Perez-Iratxeta C
   3. Ponting CP

   (2001) Protein repeats: structures, functions, and evolution

   Journal of Structural Biology 134:117–131.

   https://doi.org/10.1006/jsbi.2001.4392

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Annear DJ
   2. Vandeweyer G
   3. Sanchis-Juan A
   4. Raymond FL
   5. Kooy RF

   (2022) Non-Mendelian inheritance patterns and extreme deviation rates of CGG repeats in autism

   Genome Research 32:1967–1980.

   https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.277011.122

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Ash PEA
   2. Bieniek KF
   3. Gendron TF
   4. Caulfield T
   5. Lin WL
   6. Dejesus-Hernandez M
   7. van Blitterswijk MM
   8. Jansen-West K
   9. Paul JW
   10. Rademakers R
   11. Boylan KB
   12. Dickson DW
   13. Petrucelli L

   (2013) Unconventional translation of c9orf72 GGGGCC expansion generates insoluble polypeptides specific to c9ftd/ALS

   Neuron 77:639–646.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.02.004

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Ashkenazi A
   2. Bento CF
   3. Ricketts T
   4. Vicinanza M
   5. Siddiqi F
   6. Pavel M
   7. Squitieri F
   8. Hardenberg MC
   9. Imarisio S
   10. Menzies FM
   11. Rubinsztein DC

   (2017) Polyglutamine tracts regulate Beclin 1-dependent autophagy

   Nature 545:108–111.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22078

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Aslanidis C
   2. Jansen G
   3. Amemiya C
   4. Shutler G
   5. Mahadevan M
   6. Tsilfidis C
   7. Chen C
   8. Alleman J
   9. Wormskamp NGM
   10. Vooijs M

   (1992) Cloning of the essential myotonic dystrophy region and mapping of the putative defect

   Nature 355:548–551.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/355548a0

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Bañez-Coronel M
   2. Ayhan F
   3. Tarabochia AD
   4. Zu T
   5. Perez BA
   6. Tusi SK
   7. Pletnikova O
   8. Borchelt DR
   9. Ross CA
   10. Margolis RL
   11. Yachnis AT
   12. Troncoso JC
   13. Ranum LPW

   (2015) RAN translation in huntington disease

   Neuron 88:667–677.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2015.10.038

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Bäuerlein FJB
    2. Saha I
    3. Mishra A
    4. Kalemanov M
    5. Martínez-Sánchez A
    6. Klein R
    7. Dudanova I
    8. Hipp MS
    9. Hartl FU
    10. Baumeister W
    11. Fernández-Busnadiego R

    (2017) In situ architecture and cellular interactions of polyQ inclusions

    Cell 171:179–187.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Beilina A
    2. Tassone F
    3. Schwartz PH
    4. Sahota P
    5. Hagerman PJ

    (2004) Redistribution of transcription start sites within the FMR1 promoter region with expansion of the downstream CGG-repeat element

    Human Molecular Genetics 13:543–549.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddh053

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Belotserkovskii BP
    2. Liu R
    3. Tornaletti S
    4. Krasilnikova MM
    5. Mirkin SM
    6. Hanawalt PC

    (2010) Mechanisms and implications of transcription blockage by guanine-rich DNA sequences

    PNAS 107:12816–12821.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1007580107

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Belzil VV
    2. Bauer PO
    3. Prudencio M
    4. Gendron TF
    5. Stetler CT
    6. Yan IK
    7. Pregent L
    8. Daughrity L
    9. Baker MC
    10. Rademakers R
    11. Boylan K
    12. Patel TC
    13. Dickson DW
    14. Petrucelli L

    (2013) Reduced C9orf72 gene expression in c9FTD/ALS is caused by histone trimethylation, an epigenetic event detectable in blood

    Acta Neuropathologica 126:895–905.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-013-1199-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Bentele K
    2. Saffert P
    3. Rauscher R
    4. Ignatova Z
    5. Blüthgen N

    (2013) Efficient translation initiation dictates codon usage at gene start

    Molecular Systems Biology 9:675.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/msb.2013.32

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Betley JN
    2. Frith MC
    3. Graber JH
    4. Choo S
    5. Deshler JO

    (2002) A ubiquitous and conserved signal for RNA localization in chordates

    Current Biology 12:1756–1761.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0960-9822(02)01220-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Black DL

    (2003) Mechanisms of alternative pre-messenger RNA splicing

    Annual Review of Biochemistry 72:291–336.

    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biochem.72.121801.161720

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Blackledge NP
    2. Thomson JP
    3. Skene PJ

    (2013) Cpg island chromatin is shaped by recruitment of ZF-cxxc proteins

    Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology 5:a018648.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/cshperspect.a018648

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Boivin M
    2. Deng J
    3. Pfister V
    4. Grandgirard E
    5. Oulad-Abdelghani M
    6. Morlet B
    7. Ruffenach F
    8. Negroni L
    9. Koebel P
    10. Jacob H
    11. Riet F
    12. Dijkstra AA
    13. McFadden K
    14. Clayton WA
    15. Hong D
    16. Miyahara H
    17. Iwasaki Y
    18. Sone J
    19. Wang Z
    20. Charlet-Berguerand N

    (2021) Translation of GGC repeat expansions into a toxic polyglycine protein in NIID defines a novel class of human genetic disorders: the polyg diseases

    Neuron 109:1825–1835.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2021.03.038

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Bolton KA
    2. Ross JP
    3. Grice DM
    4. Bowden NA
    5. Holliday EG
    6. Avery-Kiejda KA
    7. Scott RJ

    (2013) STaRRRT: a table of short tandem repeats in regulatory regions of the human genome

    BMC Genomics 14:1–16.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-14-795

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Botta A
    2. Rinaldi F
    3. Catalli C
    4. Vergani L
    5. Bonifazi E
    6. Romeo V
    7. Loro E
    8. Viola A
    9. Angelini C
    10. Novelli G

    (2008) The CTG repeat expansion size correlates with the splicing defects observed in muscles from myotonic dystrophy type 1 patients

    Journal of Medical Genetics 45:639–646.

    https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.2008.058909

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Bourque G

    (2009) Transposable elements in gene regulation and in the evolution of vertebrate genomes

    Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 19:607–612.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2009.10.013

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Britten RJ
    2. Kohne DE

    (1968) Repeated sequences in DNA: hundreds of thousands of copies of DNA sequences have been incorporated into the genomes of higher organisms

    Science 161:529–540.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.161.3841.529

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Brook JD
    2. McCurrach ME
    3. Harley HG
    4. Buckler AJ
    5. Church D
    6. Aburatani H
    7. Hunter K
    8. Stanton VP
    9. Thirion JP
    10. Hudson T

    (1992) Molecular basis of myotonic dystrophy: expansion of a trinucleotide (CTG) repeat at the 3’ end of a transcript encoding a protein kinase family member

    Cell 68:799–808.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(92)90154-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Brouwer JR
    2. Huizer K
    3. Severijnen LA
    4. Hukema RK
    5. Berman RF
    6. Oostra BA
    7. Willemsen R

    (2008) Cgg-Repeat length and neuropathological and molecular correlates in a mouse model for fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

    Journal of Neurochemistry 107:1671–1682.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-4159.2008.05747.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Brouwer JR
    2. Huguet A
    3. Nicole A
    4. Munnich A
    5. Gourdon G

    (2013) Transcriptionally repressive chromatin remodelling and CpG methylation in the presence of expanded CTG-repeats at the DM1 locus

    Journal of Nucleic Acids 2013:1–16.

    https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/567435

    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Brunberg JA
    2. Jacquemont S
    3. Hagerman RJ
    4. Berry-Kravis EM
    5. Grigsby J
    6. Leehey MA
    7. Tassone F
    8. Brown WT
    9. Greco CM
    10. Hagerman PJ

    (2002)

    Fragile X premutation carriers: characteristic MR imaging findings of adult male patients with progressive cerebellar and cognitive dysfunction

    AJNR. American Journal of Neuroradiology 23:1757–1766.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Buijsen RAM
    2. Sellier C
    3. Severijnen L
    4. Oulad-Abdelghani M
    5. Verhagen RFM
    6. Berman RF
    7. Charlet-Berguerand N
    8. Willemsen R
    9. Hukema RK

    (2014) FMRpolyG-positive inclusions in CNS and non-CNS organs of a fragile X premutation carrier with fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

    Acta Neuropathologica Communications 2:162.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-014-0162-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Buxton J
    2. Shelbourne P
    3. Davies J
    4. Jones C
    5. Van Tongeren T
    6. Aslanidis C
    7. de Jong P
    8. Jansen G
    9. Anvret M
    10. Riley B

    (1992) Detection of an unstable fragment of DNA specific to individuals with myotonic dystrophy

    Nature 355:547–548.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/355547a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Caron NS
    2. Desmond CR
    3. Xia J
    4. Truant R

    (2013) Polyglutamine domain flexibility mediates the proximity between flanking sequences in huntingtin

    PNAS 110:14610–14615.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1301342110

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Cerro-Herreros E
    2. Chakraborty M
    3. Pérez-Alonso M
    4. Artero R
    5. Llamusí B

    (2017) Expanded CCUG repeat RNA expression in Drosophila heart and muscle trigger myotonic dystrophy type 1-like phenotypes and activate autophagocytosis genes

    Scientific Reports 7:2843.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-02829-3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Chakraborty A
    2. Jenjaroenpun P
    3. Li J
    4. El Hilali S
    5. McCulley A
    6. Haarer B
    7. Hoffman EA
    8. Belak A
    9. Thorland A
    10. Hehnly H
    11. Schildkraut CL
    12. Chen CL
    13. Kuznetsov VA
    14. Feng W

    (2020) Replication stress induces global chromosome breakage in the fragile X genome

    Cell Reports 32:108179.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108179

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Chávez S
    2. Beilharz T
    3. Rondón AG
    4. Erdjument-Bromage H
    5. Tempst P
    6. Svejstrup JQ
    7. Lithgow T
    8. Aguilera A

    (2000) A protein complex containing tho2, hpr1, mft1 and a novel protein, thp2, connects transcription elongation with mitotic recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

    The EMBO Journal 19:5824–5834.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/19.21.5824

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Chávez S
    2. García-Rubio M
    3. Prado F
    4. Aguilera A

    (2001) Hpr1 is preferentially required for transcription of either long or G+C-rich DNA sequences in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 21:7054–7064.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.21.20.7054-7064.2001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Choong CS
    2. Wilson EM

    (1998) Trinucleotide repeats in the human androgen receptor: a molecular basis for disease

    Journal of Molecular Endocrinology 21:235–257.

    https://doi.org/10.1677/jme.0.0210235

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Chudley AE
    2. Hagerman RJ

    (1987) Fragile X syndrome

    The Journal of Pediatrics 110:821–831.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-3476(87)80392-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Ciesiolka A
    2. Jazurek M
    3. Drazkowska K
    4. Krzyzosiak WJ

    (2017) Structural characteristics of simple RNA repeats associated with disease and their deleterious protein interactions

    Frontiers in Cellular Neuroscience 11:97.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fncel.2017.00097

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Cleary JD
    2. Ranum LP

    (2017) New developments in Ran translation: insights from multiple diseases

    Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 44:125–134.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2017.03.006

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Clouaire T
    2. Webb S
    3. Skene P
    4. Illingworth R
    5. Kerr A
    6. Andrews R
    7. Lee JH
    8. Skalnik D
    9. Bird A

    (2012) Cfp1 integrates both CpG content and gene activity for accurate H3K4me3 deposition in embryonic stem cells

    Genes & Development 26:1714–1728.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.194209.112

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Coffee B
    2. Zhang F
    3. Ceman S
    4. Warren ST
    5. Reines D

    (2002) Histone modifications depict an aberrantly heterochromatinized FMR1 gene in fragile X syndrome

    American Journal of Human Genetics 71:923–932.

    https://doi.org/10.1086/342931

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Colak D
    2. Zaninovic N
    3. Cohen MS
    4. Rosenwaks Z
    5. Yang WY
    6. Gerhardt J
    7. Disney MD
    8. Jaffrey SR

    (2014) Promoter-Bound trinucleotide repeat mRNA drives epigenetic silencing in fragile X syndrome

    Science 343:1002–1005.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1245831

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Comfort NC

    (2001) From controlling elements to transposons: Barbara McClintock and the Nobel Prize

    Trends in Genetics 17:475–478.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0168-9525(01)02383-6

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Cortese A
    2. Simone R
    3. Sullivan R
    4. Vandrovcova J
    5. Tariq H
    6. Yau WY
    7. Humphrey J
    8. Jaunmuktane Z
    9. Sivakumar P
    10. Polke J
    11. Ilyas M
    12. Tribollet E
    13. Tomaselli PJ
    14. Devigili G
    15. Callegari I
    16. Versino M
    17. Salpietro V
    18. Efthymiou S
    19. Kaski D
    20. Wood NW
    21. Andrade NS
    22. Buglo E
    23. Rebelo A
    24. Rossor AM
    25. Bronstein A
    26. Fratta P
    27. Marques WJ
    28. Züchner S
    29. Reilly MM
    30. Houlden H

    (2019) Biallelic expansion of an intronic repeat in RFC1 is a common cause of late-onset ataxia

    Nature Genetics 51:649–658.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0372-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Cournac A
    2. Koszul R
    3. Mozziconacci J

    (2016) The 3D folding of metazoan genomes correlates with the association of similar repetitive elements

    Nucleic Acids Research 44:245–255.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv1292

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Davies JE
    2. Rubinsztein DC

    (2006) Polyalanine and polyserine frameshift products in Huntington’s disease

    Journal of Medical Genetics 43:893–896.

    https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.2006.044222

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Davis BM
    2. McCurrach ME
    3. Taneja KL
    4. Singer RH
    5. Housman DE

    (1997) Expansion of a CUG trinucleotide repeat in the 3’ untranslated region of myotonic dystrophy protein kinase transcripts results in nuclear retention of transcripts

    PNAS 94:7388–7393.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.14.7388

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Deaton AM
    2. Bird A

    (2011) Cpg islands and the regulation of transcription

    Genes & Development 25:1010–1022.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.2037511

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Debacker K
    2. Kooy RF

    (2007) Fragile sites and human disease

    Human Molecular Genetics 16 Spec No. 2:R150–R158.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddm136

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Deininger P

    (2011) Alu elements: know the SINEs

    Genome Biology 12:1–12.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2011-12-12-236

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. de Koning APJ
    2. Gu W
    3. Castoe TA
    4. Batzer MA
    5. Pollock DD

    (2011) Repetitive elements may comprise over two-thirds of the human genome

    PLOS Genetics 7:e1002384.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002384

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Deng J
    2. Yu J
    3. Li P
    4. Luan X
    5. Cao L
    6. Zhao J
    7. Yu M
    8. Zhang W
    9. Lv H
    10. Xie Z
    11. Meng L
    12. Zheng Y
    13. Zhao Y
    14. Gang Q
    15. Wang Q
    16. Liu J
    17. Zhu M
    18. Guo X
    19. Su Y
    20. Liang Y
    21. Liang F
    22. Hayashi T
    23. Maeda MH
    24. Sato T
    25. Ura S
    26. Oya Y
    27. Ogasawara M
    28. Iida A
    29. Nishino I
    30. Zhou C
    31. Yan C
    32. Yuan Y
    33. Hong D
    34. Wang Z

    (2020) Expansion of GGC repeat in GIPC1 is associated with oculopharyngodistal myopathy

    American Journal of Human Genetics 106:793–804.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2020.04.011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Derbis M
    2. Konieczny P
    3. Walczak A
    4. Sekrecki M
    5. Sobczak K

    (2018) Quantitative evaluation of toxic polyglycine biosynthesis and aggregation in cell models expressing expanded CGG repeats

    Frontiers in Genetics 9:216.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00216

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Ding Y
    2. Shah P
    3. Plotkin JB

    (2012) Weak 5’-mrna secondary structures in short eukaryotic genes

    Genome Biology and Evolution 4:1046–1053.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/gbe/evs082

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Dion V
    2. Wilson JH

    (2009) Instability and chromatin structure of expanded trinucleotide repeats

    Trends in Genetics 25:288–297.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2009.04.007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Disney MD
    2. Liu B
    3. Yang WY
    4. Sellier C
    5. Tran T
    6. Charlet-Berguerand N
    7. Childs-Disney JL

    (2012) A small molecule that targets R (CGG) (EXP) and improves defects in fragile X-associated tremor ataxia syndrome

    ACS Chemical Biology 7:1711–1718.

    https://doi.org/10.1021/cb300135h

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Du H
    2. Cline MS
    3. Osborne RJ
    4. Tuttle DL
    5. Clark TA
    6. Donohue JP
    7. Hall MP
    8. Shiue L
    9. Swanson MS
    10. Thornton CA
    11. Ares M Jr

    (2010) Aberrant alternative splicing and extracellular matrix gene expression in mouse models of myotonic dystrophy

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 17:187–193.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.1720

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Duvick L
    2. Barnes J
    3. Ebner B
    4. Agrawal S
    5. Andresen M
    6. Lim J
    7. Giesler GJ
    8. Zoghbi HY
    9. Orr HT

    (2010) SCA1-like disease in mice expressing wild-type ataxin-1 with a serine to aspartic acid replacement at residue 776

    Neuron 67:929–935.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2010.08.022

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Eichler EE
    2. Kunst CB
    3. Lugenbeel KA
    4. Ryder OA
    5. Davison D
    6. Warren ST
    7. Nelson DL

    (1995) Evolution of the cryptic FMR1 CGG repeat

    Nature Genetics 11:301–308.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1195-301

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Elden AC
    2. Kim H-J
    3. Hart MP
    4. Chen-Plotkin AS
    5. Johnson BS
    6. Fang X
    7. Armakola M
    8. Geser F
    9. Greene R
    10. Lu MM
    11. Padmanabhan A
    12. Clay-Falcone D
    13. McCluskey L
    14. Elman L
    15. Juhr D
    16. Gruber PJ
    17. Rüb U
    18. Auburger G
    19. Trojanowski JQ
    20. Lee VM-Y
    21. Van Deerlin VM
    22. Bonini NM
    23. Gitler AD

    (2010) Ataxin-2 intermediate-length polyglutamine expansions are associated with increased risk for ALS

    Nature 466:1069–1075.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09320

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Elizur SE
    2. Dratviman-Storobinsky O
    3. Derech-Haim S
    4. Lebovitz O
    5. Dor J
    6. Orvieto R
    7. Cohen Y

    (2016) FMR6 may play a role in the pathogenesis of fragile X-associated premature ovarian insufficiency

    Gynecological Endocrinology 32:334–337.

    https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2015.1116508

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Emamian ES
    2. Kaytor MD
    3. Duvick LA
    4. Zu T
    5. Tousey SK
    6. Zoghbi HY
    7. Clark HB
    8. Orr HT

    (2003) Serine 776 of ataxin-1 is critical for polyglutamine-induced disease in SCA1 transgenic mice

    Neuron 38:375–387.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(03)00258-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Entezam A
    2. Biacsi R
    3. Orrison B
    4. Saha T
    5. Hoffman GE
    6. Grabczyk E
    7. Nussbaum RL
    8. Usdin K

    (2007) Regional FMRP deficits and large repeat expansions into the full mutation range in a new fragile X premutation mouse model

    Gene 395:125–134.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2007.02.026

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Fan HY
    2. Cheng KK
    3. Klein HL

    (1996) Mutations in the RNA polymerase II transcription machinery suppress the hyperrecombination mutant hpr1 delta of Saccharomyces cerevisiae

    Genetics 142:749–759.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/genetics/142.3.749

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Fan HY
    2. Merker RJ
    3. Klein HL

    (2001) High-Copy-Number expression of Sub2p, a member of the RNA helicase superfamily, suppresses hpr1-mediated genomic instability

    Molecular and Cellular Biology 21:5459–5470.

    https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.21.16.5459-5470.2001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Fardaei M
    2. Larkin K
    3. Brook JD
    4. Hamshere MG

    (2001) In vivo co-localisation of MBNL protein with DMPK expanded-repeat transcripts

    Nucleic Acids Research 29:2766–2771.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/29.13.2766

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Faux N

    (2012) Single amino acid and trinucleotide repeats: function and evolution

    Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology 769:26–40.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5434-2_3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Fay MM
    2. Anderson PJ
    3. Ivanov P

    (2017) ALS/FTD-associated C9orf72 repeat RNA promotes phase transitions in vitro and in cells

    Cell Reports 21:3573–3584.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2017.11.093

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Fondon JW
    2. Garner HR

    (2004) Molecular origins of rapid and continuous morphological evolution

    PNAS 101:18058–18063.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0408118101

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Fotsing SF
    2. Margoliash J
    3. Wang C
    4. Saini S
    5. Yanicky R
    6. Shleizer-Burko S
    7. Goren A
    8. Gymrek M

    (2019) The impact of short tandem repeat variation on gene expression

    Nature Genetics 51:1652–1659.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0521-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Franich NR
    2. Hickey MA
    3. Zhu C
    4. Osborne GF
    5. Ali N
    6. Chu T
    7. Bove NH
    8. Lemesre V
    9. Lerner RP
    10. Zeitlin SO
    11. Howland D
    12. Neueder A
    13. Landles C
    14. Bates GP
    15. Chesselet M-F

    (2019) Phenotype onset in Huntington’s disease knock-in mice is correlated with the incomplete splicing of the mutant huntingtin gene

    Journal of Neuroscience Research 97:1590–1605.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/jnr.24493

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Freibaum BD
    2. Lu Y
    3. Lopez-Gonzalez R
    4. Kim NC
    5. Almeida S
    6. Lee K-H
    7. Badders N
    8. Valentine M
    9. Miller BL
    10. Wong PC
    11. Petrucelli L
    12. Kim HJ
    13. Gao F-B
    14. Taylor JP

    (2015) GGGGCC repeat expansion in c9orf72 compromises nucleocytoplasmic transport

    Nature 525:129–133.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14974

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Fry M
    2. Loeb LA

    (1994) The fragile X syndrome D (CGG) N nucleotide repeats form a stable tetrahelical structure

    PNAS 91:4950–4954.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.91.11.4950

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Fu YH
    2. Kuhl DP
    3. Pizzuti A
    4. Pieretti M
    5. Sutcliffe JS
    6. Richards S
    7. Verkerk AJ
    8. Holden JJ
    9. Fenwick RG
    10. Warren ST

    (1991) Variation of the CGG repeat at the fragile X site results in genetic instability: resolution of the sherman paradox

    Cell 67:1047–1058.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(91)90283-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Fu YH
    2. Pizzuti A
    3. Fenwick RG Jr
    4. King J
    5. Rajnarayan S
    6. Dunne PW
    7. Dubel J
    8. Nasser GA
    9. Ashizawa T
    10. de Jong P

    (1992) An unstable triplet repeat in a gene related to myotonic muscular dystrophy

    Science 255:1256–1258.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1546326

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Gao FB
    2. Richter JD
    3. Cleveland DW

    (2017) Rethinking unconventional translation in neurodegeneration

    Cell 171:994–1000.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.10.042

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Garg P
    2. Martin-Trujillo A
    3. Rodriguez OL
    4. Gies SJ
    5. Hadelia E
    6. Jadhav B
    7. Jain M
    8. Paten B
    9. Sharp AJ

    (2021) Pervasive cis effects of variation in copy number of large tandem repeats on local DNA methylation and gene expression

    American Journal of Human Genetics 108:809–824.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.03.016

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Gaspar C
    2. Jannatipour M
    3. Dion P
    4. Laganière J
    5. Sequeiros J
    6. Brais B
    7. Rouleau GA

    (2000) CAG tract of MJD-1 may be prone to frameshifts causing polyalanine accumulation

    Human Molecular Genetics 9:1957–1966.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/9.13.1957

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Gasset-Rosa F
    2. Chillon-Marinas C
    3. Goginashvili A
    4. Atwal RS
    5. Artates JW
    6. Tabet R
    7. Wheeler VC
    8. Bang AG
    9. Cleveland DW
    10. Lagier-Tourenne C

    (2017) Polyglutamine-expanded huntingtin exacerbates age-related disruption of nuclear integrity and nucleocytoplasmic transport

    Neuron 94:48–57.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.03.027

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Gecz J
    2. Gedeon AK
    3. Sutherland GR
    4. Mulley JC

    (1996) Identification of the gene FMR2, associated with FRAXE mental retardation

    Nature Genetics 13:105–108.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng0596-105

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Gecz J

    (2000) The FMR2 gene, FRAXE and non-specific X-linked mental retardation: clinical and molecular aspects

    Annals of Human Genetics 64:95–106.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003480000007983

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Gemmell NJ

    (2021) Repetitive DNA: genomic dark matter matters

    Nature Reviews. Genetics 22:342.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-021-00354-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Gendron TF
    2. Bieniek KF
    3. Zhang Y-J
    4. Jansen-West K
    5. Ash PEA
    6. Caulfield T
    7. Daughrity L
    8. Dunmore JH
    9. Castanedes-Casey M
    10. Chew J
    11. Cosio DM
    12. van Blitterswijk M
    13. Lee WC
    14. Rademakers R
    15. Boylan KB
    16. Dickson DW
    17. Petrucelli L

    (2013) Antisense transcripts of the expanded C9ORF72 hexanucleotide repeat form nuclear RNA foci and undergo repeat-associated non-ATG translation in c9ftd/ALS

    Acta Neuropathologica 126:829–844.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-013-1192-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Gerhardt J
    2. Tomishima MJ
    3. Zaninovic N
    4. Colak D
    5. Yan Z
    6. Zhan Q
    7. Rosenwaks Z
    8. Jaffrey SR
    9. Schildkraut CL

    (2014) The DNA replication program is altered at the FMR1 locus in fragile X embryonic stem cells

    Molecular Cell 53:19–31.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2013.10.029

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
83. 1. Gipson TA
    2. Neueder A
    3. Wexler NS
    4. Bates GP
    5. Housman D

    (2013) Aberrantly spliced HTT, a new player in Huntington’s disease pathogenesis

    RNA Biology 10:1647–1652.

    https://doi.org/10.4161/rna.26706

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Glineburg MR
    2. Todd PK
    3. Charlet-Berguerand N
    4. Sellier C

    (2018) Repeat-Associated non-AUG (Ran) translation and other molecular mechanisms in fragile X tremor ataxia syndrome

    Brain Research 1693:43–54.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2018.02.006

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Glover TW

    (2006) Common fragile sites

    Cancer Letters 232:4–12.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2005.08.032

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Gohel D
    2. Sripada L
    3. Prajapati P
    4. Singh K
    5. Roy M
    6. Kotadia D
    7. Tassone F
    8. Charlet-Berguerand N
    9. Singh R

    (2019) FMRpolyG alters mitochondrial transcripts level and respiratory chain complex assembly in fragile X associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

    Biochimica et Biophysica Acta. Molecular Basis of Disease 1865:1379–1388.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbadis.2019.02.010

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Goodwin M
    2. Mohan A
    3. Batra R
    4. Lee K-Y
    5. Charizanis K
    6. Fernández Gómez FJ
    7. Eddarkaoui S
    8. Sergeant N
    9. Buée L
    10. Kimura T
    11. Clark HB
    12. Dalton J
    13. Takamura K
    14. Weyn-Vanhentenryck SM
    15. Zhang C
    16. Reid T
    17. Ranum LPW
    18. Day JW
    19. Swanson MS

    (2015) Mbnl sequestration by toxic RNAs and RNA misprocessing in the myotonic dystrophy brain

    Cell Reports 12:1159–1168.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.07.029

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Grabczyk E
    2. Fishman MC

    (1995) A long purine-pyrimidine homopolymer acts as a transcriptional diode

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 270:1791–1797.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.270.4.1791

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Greene E
    2. Mahishi L
    3. Entezam A
    4. Kumari D
    5. Usdin K

    (2007) Repeat-Induced epigenetic changes in intron 1 of the frataxin gene and its consequences in Friedreich ataxia

    Nucleic Acids Research 35:3383–3390.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkm271

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
90. 1. Grima JC
    2. Daigle JG
    3. Arbez N
    4. Cunningham KC
    5. Zhang K
    6. Ochaba J
    7. Geater C
    8. Morozko E
    9. Stocksdale J
    10. Glatzer JC
    11. Pham JT
    12. Ahmed I
    13. Peng Q
    14. Wadhwa H
    15. Pletnikova O
    16. Troncoso JC
    17. Duan W
    18. Snyder SH
    19. Ranum LPW
    20. Thompson LM
    21. Lloyd TE
    22. Ross CA
    23. Rothstein JD

    (2017) Mutant huntingtin disrupts the nuclear pore complex

    Neuron 94:93–107.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.03.023

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
91. 1. Groh M
    2. Silva LM
    3. Gromak N

    (2014) Mechanisms of transcriptional dysregulation in repeat expansion disorders

    Biochemical Society Transactions 42:1123–1128.

    https://doi.org/10.1042/BST20140049

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
92. 1. Gu Y
    2. Shen Y
    3. Gibbs RA
    4. Nelson DL

    (1996) Identification of FMR2, a novel gene associated with the FRAXE CCG repeat and CpG island

    Nature Genetics 13:109–113.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng0596-109

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
93. 1. Gymrek M
    2. Willems T
    3. Guilmatre A
    4. Zeng H
    5. Markus B
    6. Georgiev S
    7. Daly MJ
    8. Price AL
    9. Pritchard JK
    10. Sharp AJ
    11. Erlich Y

    (2016) Abundant contribution of short tandem repeats to gene expression variation in humans

    Nature Genetics 48:22–29.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3461

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. Gymrek M

    (2017) A genomic view of short tandem repeats

    Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 44:9–16.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2017.01.012

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
95. 1. Gymrek M
    2. Willems T
    3. Reich D
    4. Erlich Y

    (2017) Interpreting short tandem repeat variations in humans using mutational constraint

    Nature Genetics 49:1495–1501.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3952

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
96. 1. Hagerman RJ
    2. Jackson AW
    3. Levitas A
    4. Rimland B
    5. Braden M

    (1986) An analysis of autism in fifty males with the fragile X syndrome

    American Journal of Medical Genetics 23:359–374.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ajmg.1320230128

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Hagerman RJ
    2. Leehey M
    3. Heinrichs W
    4. Tassone F
    5. Wilson R
    6. Hills J
    7. Grigsby J
    8. Gage B
    9. Hagerman PJ

    (2001) Intention tremor, parkinsonism, and generalized brain atrophy in male carriers of fragile X

    Neurology 57:127–130.

    https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.57.1.127

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
98. Book

    1. Hagerman RJ
    2. Hagerman PJ

    (2002a) Fragile X Syndrome: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Research

    United States: Taylor & Francis.

    https://doi.org/10.56021/9780801868436

    • Google Scholar
99. 1. Hagerman RJ
    2. Hagerman PJ

    (2002b) The fragile X premutation: into the phenotypic fold

    Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 12:278–283.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-437x(02)00299-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
100. 1. Hagerman PJ
     2. Hagerman RJ

     (2004) Fragile X-associated Tremor/Ataxia Syndrome (FXTAS)

     Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews 10:25–30.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/mrdd.20005

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
101. 1. Hagerman PJ
     2. Hagerman RJ

     (2015) Fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

     Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1338:58–70.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.12693

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
102. 1. Hagerman RJ
     2. Berry-Kravis E
     3. Hazlett HC
     4. Bailey DB
     5. Moine H
     6. Kooy RF
     7. Tassone F
     8. Gantois I
     9. Sonenberg N
     10. Mandel JL
     11. Hagerman PJ

     (2017) Fragile X syndrome

     Nature Reviews. Disease Primers 3:17065.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2017.65

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
103. 1. Hammock EAD
     2. Young LJ

     (2005) Microsatellite instability generates diversity in brain and sociobehavioral traits

     Science 308:1630–1634.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1111427

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
104. 1. Hannan AJ

     (2018) Tandem repeats mediating genetic plasticity in health and disease

     Nature Reviews. Genetics 19:286–298.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg.2017.115

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
105. 1. Hansen RS
     2. Gartler SM
     3. Scott CR
     4. Chen SH
     5. Laird CD

     (1992) Methylation analysis of CGG sites in the CpG island of the human FMR1 gene

     Human Molecular Genetics 1:571–578.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/1.8.571

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
106. 1. Harley HG
     2. Brook JD
     3. Rundle SA
     4. Crow S
     5. Reardon W
     6. Buckler AJ
     7. Harper PS
     8. Housman DE
     9. Shaw DJ

     (1992) Expansion of an unstable DNA region and phenotypic variation in myotonic dystrophy

     Nature 355:545–546.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/355545a0

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
107. 1. Hautbergue GM
     2. Castelli LM
     3. Ferraiuolo L
     4. Sanchez-Martinez A
     5. Cooper-Knock J
     6. Higginbottom A
     7. Lin YH
     8. Bauer CS
     9. Dodd JE
     10. Myszczynska MA
     11. Alam SM
     12. Garneret P
     13. Chandran JS
     14. Karyka E
     15. Stopford MJ
     16. Smith EF
     17. Kirby J
     18. Meyer K
     19. Kaspar BK
     20. Isaacs AM
     21. El-Khamisy SF
     22. De Vos KJ
     23. Ning K
     24. Azzouz M
     25. Whitworth AJ
     26. Shaw PJ

     (2017) SRSF1-dependent nuclear export inhibition of c9orf72 repeat transcripts prevents neurodegeneration and associated motor deficits

     Nature Communications 8:16063.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms16063

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
108. 1. He F
     2. Krans A
     3. Freibaum BD
     4. Taylor JP
     5. Todd PK

     (2014) Tdp-43 suppresses CGG repeat-induced neurotoxicity through interactions with hnRNP A2/B1

     Human Molecular Genetics 23:5036–5051.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddu216

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
109. 1. Heitz D
     2. Rousseau F
     3. Devys D
     4. Saccone S
     5. Abderrahim H
     6. Le Paslier D
     7. Cohen D
     8. Vincent A
     9. Toniolo D
     10. Della Valle G

     (1991) Isolation of sequences that span the fragile X and identification of a fragile X-related cpg island

     Science 251:1236–1239.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.2006411

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
110. 1. Herman D
     2. Jenssen K
     3. Burnett R
     4. Soragni E
     5. Perlman SL
     6. Gottesfeld JM

     (2006) Histone deacetylase inhibitors reverse gene silencing in Friedreich’s ataxia

     Nature Chemical Biology 2:551–558.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nchembio815

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
111. 1. Hinnebusch AG
     2. Ivanov IP
     3. Sonenberg N

     (2016) Translational control by 5’-untranslated regions of eukaryotic mrnas

     Science 352:1413–1416.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad9868

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
112. 1. Hoem G
     2. Bowitz Larsen K
     3. Øvervatn A
     4. Brech A
     5. Lamark T
     6. Sjøttem E
     7. Johansen T

     (2019) The fmrpolyglycine protein mediates aggregate formation and toxicity independent of the CGG mrna hairpin in a cellular model for FXTAS

     Frontiers in Genetics 10:249.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2019.00249

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
113. 1. Huh GS
     2. Hynes RO

     (1994) Regulation of alternative pre-mRNA splicing by a novel repeated hexanucleotide element

     Genes & Development 8:1561–1574.

     https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.8.13.1561

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
114. 1. Irwin S
     2. Vandelft M
     3. Pinchev D
     4. Howell JL
     5. Graczyk J
     6. Orr HT
     7. Truant R

     (2005) RNA association and nucleocytoplasmic shuttling by ataxin-1

     Journal of Cell Science 118:233–242.

     https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.01611

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
115. 1. Ishiguro T
     2. Sato N
     3. Ueyama M
     4. Fujikake N
     5. Sellier C
     6. Kanegami A
     7. Tokuda E
     8. Zamiri B
     9. Gall-Duncan T
     10. Mirceta M
     11. Furukawa Y
     12. Yokota T
     13. Wada K
     14. Taylor JP
     15. Pearson CE
     16. Charlet-Berguerand N
     17. Mizusawa H
     18. Nagai Y
     19. Ishikawa K

     (2017) Regulatory role of RNA chaperone TDP-43 for RNA misfolding and repeat-associated translation in SCA31

     Neuron 94:108–124.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.02.046

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
116. 1. Ishiura H
     2. Doi K
     3. Mitsui J
     4. Yoshimura J
     5. Matsukawa MK
     6. Fujiyama A
     7. Toyoshima Y
     8. Kakita A
     9. Takahashi H
     10. Suzuki Y
     11. Sugano S
     12. Qu W
     13. Ichikawa K
     14. Yurino H
     15. Higasa K
     16. Shibata S
     17. Mitsue A
     18. Tanaka M
     19. Ichikawa Y
     20. Takahashi Y
     21. Date H
     22. Matsukawa T
     23. Kanda J
     24. Nakamoto FK
     25. Higashihara M
     26. Abe K
     27. Koike R
     28. Sasagawa M
     29. Kuroha Y
     30. Hasegawa N
     31. Kanesawa N
     32. Kondo T
     33. Hitomi T
     34. Tada M
     35. Takano H
     36. Saito Y
     37. Sanpei K
     38. Onodera O
     39. Nishizawa M
     40. Nakamura M
     41. Yasuda T
     42. Sakiyama Y
     43. Otsuka M
     44. Ueki A
     45. Kaida K-I
     46. Shimizu J
     47. Hanajima R
     48. Hayashi T
     49. Terao Y
     50. Inomata-Terada S
     51. Hamada M
     52. Shirota Y
     53. Kubota A
     54. Ugawa Y
     55. Koh K
     56. Takiyama Y
     57. Ohsawa-Yoshida N
     58. Ishiura S
     59. Yamasaki R
     60. Tamaoka A
     61. Akiyama H
     62. Otsuki T
     63. Sano A
     64. Ikeda A
     65. Goto J
     66. Morishita S
     67. Tsuji S

     (2018) Expansions of intronic TTTCA and TTTTA repeats in benign adult familial myoclonic epilepsy

     Nature Genetics 50:581–590.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-018-0067-2

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
117. 1. Ishiura H
     2. Shibata S
     3. Yoshimura J
     4. Suzuki Y
     5. Qu W
     6. Doi K
     7. Almansour MA
     8. Kikuchi JK
     9. Taira M
     10. Mitsui J
     11. Takahashi Y
     12. Ichikawa Y
     13. Mano T
     14. Iwata A
     15. Harigaya Y
     16. Matsukawa MK
     17. Matsukawa T
     18. Tanaka M
     19. Shirota Y
     20. Ohtomo R
     21. Kowa H
     22. Date H
     23. Mitsue A
     24. Hatsuta H
     25. Morimoto S
     26. Murayama S
     27. Shiio Y
     28. Saito Y
     29. Mitsutake A
     30. Kawai M
     31. Sasaki T
     32. Sugiyama Y
     33. Hamada M
     34. Ohtomo G
     35. Terao Y
     36. Nakazato Y
     37. Takeda A
     38. Sakiyama Y
     39. Umeda-Kameyama Y
     40. Shinmi J
     41. Ogata K
     42. Kohno Y
     43. Lim S-Y
     44. Tan AH
     45. Shimizu J
     46. Goto J
     47. Nishino I
     48. Toda T
     49. Morishita S
     50. Tsuji S

     (2019) Noncoding CGG repeat expansions in neuronal intranuclear inclusion disease, oculopharyngodistal myopathy and an overlapping disease

     Nature Genetics 51:1222–1232.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0458-z

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
118. 1. Iwahashi CK
     2. Yasui DH
     3. An H-J
     4. Greco CM
     5. Tassone F
     6. Nannen K
     7. Babineau B
     8. Lebrilla CB
     9. Hagerman RJ
     10. Hagerman PJ

     (2006) Protein composition of the intranuclear inclusions of FXTAS

     Brain 129:256–271.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awh650

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
119. 1. Jacquemont S
     2. Hagerman RJ
     3. Leehey M
     4. Grigsby J
     5. Zhang L
     6. Brunberg JA
     7. Greco C
     8. Des Portes V
     9. Jardini T
     10. Levine R
     11. Berry-Kravis E
     12. Brown WT
     13. Schaeffer S
     14. Kissel J
     15. Tassone F
     16. Hagerman PJ

     (2003) Fragile X premutation tremor/ataxia syndrome: molecular, clinical, and neuroimaging correlates

     American Journal of Human Genetics 72:869–878.

     https://doi.org/10.1086/374321

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
120. 1. Jain A
     2. Vale RD

     (2017) Rna phase transitions in repeat expansion disorders

     Nature 546:243–247.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22386

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
121. 1. Jakubosky D
     2. D’Antonio M
     3. Bonder MJ
     4. Smail C
     5. Donovan MKR
     6. Young Greenwald WW
     7. Matsui H
     8. D’Antonio-Chronowska A
     9. Stegle O
     10. Smith EN
     11. Montgomery SB
     12. DeBoever C
     13. Frazer KA
     14. i2QTL Consortium

     (2020) Properties of structural variants and short tandem repeats associated with gene expression and complex traits

     Nature Communications 11:2927.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-16482-4

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
122. Book

     1. Janitz K
     2. Janitz M

     (2011) Chapter 12 - Assessing epigenetic information

     In: Tollefsbol T, editors. Handbook of Epigenetics. San Diego: Academic Press. pp. 173–181.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-375709-8.00012-5

     • Google Scholar
123. 1. Jiang H
     2. Mankodi A
     3. Swanson MS
     4. Moxley RT
     5. Thornton CA

     (2004) Myotonic dystrophy type 1 is associated with nuclear foci of mutant RNA, sequestration of muscleblind proteins and deregulated alternative splicing in neurons

     Human Molecular Genetics 13:3079–3088.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddh327

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
124. 1. Jimeno S
     2. Rondón AG
     3. Luna R
     4. Aguilera A

     (2002) The yeast THO complex and mRNA export factors link RNA metabolism with transcription and genome instability

     The EMBO Journal 21:3526–3535.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/cdf335

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
125. 1. Jin P
     2. Duan R
     3. Qurashi A
     4. Qin Y
     5. Tian D
     6. Rosser TC
     7. Liu H
     8. Feng Y
     9. Warren ST

     (2007) Pur alpha binds to rCGG repeats and modulates repeat-mediated neurodegeneration in a Drosophila model of fragile X tremor/ataxia syndrome

     Neuron 55:556–564.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2007.07.020

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
126. 1. Jog SP
     2. Paul S
     3. Dansithong W
     4. Tring S
     5. Comai L
     6. Reddy S

     (2012) Rna splicing is responsive to MBNL1 dose

     PLOS ONE 7:e48825.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0048825

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
127. 1. Jovičić A
     2. Mertens J
     3. Boeynaems S
     4. Bogaert E
     5. Chai N
     6. Yamada SB
     7. Paul JW
     8. Sun S
     9. Herdy JR
     10. Bieri G
     11. Kramer NJ
     12. Gage FH
     13. Van Den Bosch L
     14. Robberecht W
     15. Gitler AD

     (2015) Modifiers of c9orf72 dipeptide repeat toxicity connect nucleocytoplasmic transport defects to FTD/ALS

     Nature Neuroscience 18:1226–1229.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4085

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
128. 1. Kajava AV

     (2012) Tandem repeats in proteins: from sequence to structure

     Journal of Structural Biology 179:279–288.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsb.2011.08.009

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
129. 1. Katsuno M.
     2. Adachi H
     3. Kume A
     4. Li M
     5. Nakagomi Y
     6. Niwa H
     7. Sang C
     8. Kobayashi Y
     9. Doyu M
     10. Sobue G

     (2002) Testosterone reduction prevents phenotypic expression in a transgenic mouse model of spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy

     Neuron 35:843–854.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(02)00834-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
130. 1. Katsuno M
     2. Adachi H
     3. Minamiyama M
     4. Waza M
     5. Tokui K
     6. Banno H
     7. Suzuki K
     8. Onoda Y
     9. Tanaka F
     10. Doyu M
     11. Sobue G

     (2006) Reversible disruption of dynactin 1-mediated retrograde axonal transport in polyglutamine-induced motor neuron degeneration

     The Journal of Neuroscience 26:12106–12117.

     https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3032-06.2006

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
131. 1. Kearse MG
     2. Todd PK

     (2014) Repeat-Associated non-AUG translation and its impact in neurodegenerative disease

     Neurotherapeutics 11:721–731.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s13311-014-0292-z

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
132. 1. Kearse MG
     2. Green KM
     3. Krans A
     4. Rodriguez CM
     5. Linsalata AE
     6. Goldstrohm AC
     7. Todd PK

     (2016) Cgg repeat-associated non-AUG translation utilizes a cap-dependent scanning mechanism of initiation to produce toxic proteins

     Molecular Cell 62:314–322.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2016.02.034

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
133. 1. Kenneson A
     2. Zhang F
     3. Hagedorn CH
     4. Warren ST

     (2001) Reduced FMRP and increased FMR1 transcription is proportionally associated with CGG repeat number in intermediate-length and premutation carriers

     Human Molecular Genetics 10:1449–1454.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/10.14.1449

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
134. 1. Kettani A
     2. Kumar RA
     3. Patel DJ

     (1995) Solution structure of a DNA quadruplex containing the fragile X syndrome triplet repeat

     Journal of Molecular Biology 254:638–656.

     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1995.0644

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
135. 1. Khalil AM
     2. Faghihi MA
     3. Modarresi F
     4. Brothers SP
     5. Wahlestedt C
     6. Bajic V

     (2008) A novel RNA transcript with antiapoptotic function is silenced in fragile X syndrome

     PLOS ONE 3:e1486.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0001486

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
136. 1. Kim M
     2. Ahn SH
     3. Krogan NJ
     4. Greenblatt JF
     5. Buratowski S

     (2004) Transitions in RNA polymerase II elongation complexes at the 3’ ends of genes

     The EMBO Journal 23:354–364.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7600053

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
137. 1. Klement IA
     2. Skinner PJ
     3. Kaytor MD
     4. Yi H
     5. Hersch SM
     6. Clark HB
     7. Zoghbi HY
     8. Orr HT

     (1998) Ataxin-1 nuclear localization and aggregation: role in polyglutamine-induced disease in SCA1 transgenic mice

     Cell 95:41–53.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81781-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
138. 1. Klusek J
     2. Porter A
     3. Abbeduto L
     4. Adayev T
     5. Tassone F
     6. Mailick MR
     7. Glicksman A
     8. Tonnsen BL
     9. Roberts JE

     (2018) Curvilinear association between language disfluency and fmr1 CGG repeat size across the normal, intermediate, and premutation range

     Frontiers in Genetics 9:344.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2018.00344

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
139. 1. Knight SJL
     2. Flannery AV
     3. Hirst MC
     4. Campbell L
     5. Christodoulou Z
     6. Phelps SR
     7. Pointon J
     8. Middleton-Price HR
     9. Barnicoat A
     10. Pembrey ME

     (1993) Trinucleotide repeat amplification and hypermethylation of a CpG island in FRAXE mental retardation

     Cell 74:127–134.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(93)90300-f

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
140. 1. Korade-Mirnics Z
     2. Babitzke P
     3. Hoffman E

     (1998) Myotonic dystrophy: molecular windows on a complex etiology

     Nucleic Acids Research 26:1363–1368.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/26.6.1363

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
141. 1. Kozak M

     (1980) Influence of mRNA secondary structure on binding and migration of 40S ribosomal subunits

     Cell 19:79–90.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(80)90390-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
142. 1. Kozak M

     (1986) Influences of mrna secondary structure on initiation by eukaryotic ribosomes

     PNAS 83:2850–2854.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.83.9.2850

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
143. 1. Krans A
     2. Skariah G
     3. Zhang Y
     4. Bayly B
     5. Todd PK

     (2019) Neuropathology of ran translation proteins in fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

     Acta Neuropathologica Communications 7:152.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-019-0782-7

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
144. 1. Krzyzosiak WJ
     2. Sobczak K
     3. Wojciechowska M
     4. Fiszer A
     5. Mykowska A
     6. Kozlowski P

     (2012) Triplet repeat RNA structure and its role as pathogenic agent and therapeutic target

     Nucleic Acids Research 40:11–26.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr729

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
145. 1. Kudla G
     2. Murray AW
     3. Tollervey D
     4. Plotkin JB

     (2009) Coding-Sequence determinants of gene expression in Escherichia coli

     Science 324:255–258.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1170160

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
146. 1. La Spada AR
     2. Roling DB
     3. Harding AE
     4. Warner CL
     5. Spiegel R
     6. Hausmanowa-Petrusewicz I
     7. Yee WC
     8. Fischbeck KH

     (1992) Meiotic stability and genotype-phenotype correlation of the trinucleotide repeat in X-linked spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy

     Nature Genetics 2:301–304.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1292-301

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
147. 1. Ladd PD
     2. Smith LE
     3. Rabaia NA
     4. Moore JM
     5. Georges SA
     6. Hansen RS
     7. Hagerman RJ
     8. Tassone F
     9. Tapscott SJ
     10. Filippova GN

     (2007) An antisense transcript spanning the CGG repeat region of FMR1 is upregulated in premutation carriers but silenced in full mutation individuals

     Human Molecular Genetics 16:3174–3187.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddm293

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
148. 1. Lai S
     2. O’Callaghan B
     3. Zoghbi HY
     4. Orr HT

     (2011) 14-3-3 binding to ataxin-1 (ATXN1) regulates its dephosphorylation at Ser-776 and transport to the nucleus

     The Journal of Biological Chemistry 286:34606–34616.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M111.238527

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
149. 1. Lam YC
     2. Bowman AB
     3. Jafar-Nejad P
     4. Lim J
     5. Richman R
     6. Fryer JD
     7. Hyun ED
     8. Duvick LA
     9. Orr HT
     10. Botas J
     11. Zoghbi HY

     (2006) Ataxin-1 interacts with the repressor capicua in its native complex to cause SCA1 neuropathology

     Cell 127:1335–1347.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.11.038

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
150. 1. Lander ES
     2. Linton LM
     3. Birren B
     4. Nusbaum C
     5. Zody MC
     6. Baldwin J
     7. Devon K
     8. Dewar K
     9. Doyle M
     10. FitzHugh W
     11. Funke R
     12. Gage D
     13. Harris K
     14. Heaford A
     15. Howland J
     16. Kann L
     17. Lehoczky J
     18. LeVine R
     19. McEwan P
     20. McKernan K
     21. Meldrim J
     22. Mesirov JP
     23. Miranda C
     24. Morris W
     25. Naylor J
     26. Raymond C
     27. Rosetti M
     28. Santos R
     29. Sheridan A
     30. Sougnez C
     31. Stange-Thomann Y
     32. Stojanovic N
     33. Subramanian A
     34. Wyman D
     35. Rogers J
     36. Sulston J
     37. Ainscough R
     38. Beck S
     39. Bentley D
     40. Burton J
     41. Clee C
     42. Carter N
     43. Coulson A
     44. Deadman R
     45. Deloukas P
     46. Dunham A
     47. Dunham I
     48. Durbin R
     49. French L
     50. Grafham D
     51. Gregory S
     52. Hubbard T
     53. Humphray S
     54. Hunt A
     55. Jones M
     56. Lloyd C
     57. McMurray A
     58. Matthews L
     59. Mercer S
     60. Milne S
     61. Mullikin JC
     62. Mungall A
     63. Plumb R
     64. Ross M
     65. Shownkeen R
     66. Sims S
     67. Waterston RH
     68. Wilson RK
     69. Hillier LW
     70. McPherson JD
     71. Marra MA
     72. Mardis ER
     73. Fulton LA
     74. Chinwalla AT
     75. Pepin KH
     76. Gish WR
     77. Chissoe SL
     78. Wendl MC
     79. Delehaunty KD
     80. Miner TL
     81. Delehaunty A
     82. Kramer JB
     83. Cook LL
     84. Fulton RS
     85. Johnson DL
     86. Minx PJ
     87. Clifton SW
     88. Hawkins T
     89. Branscomb E
     90. Predki P
     91. Richardson P
     92. Wenning S
     93. Slezak T
     94. Doggett N
     95. Cheng JF
     96. Olsen A
     97. Lucas S
     98. Elkin C
     99. Uberbacher E
     100. Frazier M
     101. Gibbs RA
     102. Muzny DM
     103. Scherer SE
     104. Bouck JB
     105. Sodergren EJ
     106. Worley KC
     107. Rives CM
     108. Gorrell JH
     109. Metzker ML
     110. Naylor SL
     111. Kucherlapati RS
     112. Nelson DL
     113. Weinstock GM
     114. Sakaki Y
     115. Fujiyama A
     116. Hattori M
     117. Yada T
     118. Toyoda A
     119. Itoh T
     120. Kawagoe C
     121. Watanabe H
     122. Totoki Y
     123. Taylor T
     124. Weissenbach J
     125. Heilig R
     126. Saurin W
     127. Artiguenave F
     128. Brottier P
     129. Bruls T
     130. Pelletier E
     131. Robert C
     132. Wincker P
     133. Smith DR
     134. Doucette-Stamm L
     135. Rubenfield M
     136. Weinstock K
     137. Lee HM
     138. Dubois J
     139. Rosenthal A
     140. Platzer M
     141. Nyakatura G
     142. Taudien S
     143. Rump A
     144. Yang H
     145. Yu J
     146. Wang J
     147. Huang G
     148. Gu J
     149. Hood L
     150. Rowen L
     151. Madan A
     152. Qin S
     153. Davis RW
     154. Federspiel NA
     155. Abola AP
     156. Proctor MJ
     157. Myers RM
     158. Schmutz J
     159. Dickson M
     160. Grimwood J
     161. Cox DR
     162. Olson MV
     163. Kaul R
     164. Raymond C
     165. Shimizu N
     166. Kawasaki K
     167. Minoshima S
     168. Evans GA
     169. Athanasiou M
     170. Schultz R
     171. Roe BA
     172. Chen F
     173. Pan H
     174. Ramser J
     175. Lehrach H
     176. Reinhardt R
     177. McCombie WR
     178. de la Bastide M
     179. Dedhia N
     180. Blöcker H
     181. Hornischer K
     182. Nordsiek G
     183. Agarwala R
     184. Aravind L
     185. Bailey JA
     186. Bateman A
     187. Batzoglou S
     188. Birney E
     189. Bork P
     190. Brown DG
     191. Burge CB
     192. Cerutti L
     193. Chen HC
     194. Church D
     195. Clamp M
     196. Copley RR
     197. Doerks T
     198. Eddy SR
     199. Eichler EE
     200. Furey TS
     201. Galagan J
     202. Gilbert JG
     203. Harmon C
     204. Hayashizaki Y
     205. Haussler D
     206. Hermjakob H
     207. Hokamp K
     208. Jang W
     209. Johnson LS
     210. Jones TA
     211. Kasif S
     212. Kaspryzk A
     213. Kennedy S
     214. Kent WJ
     215. Kitts P
     216. Koonin EV
     217. Korf I
     218. Kulp D
     219. Lancet D
     220. Lowe TM
     221. McLysaght A
     222. Mikkelsen T
     223. Moran JV
     224. Mulder N
     225. Pollara VJ
     226. Ponting CP
     227. Schuler G
     228. Schultz J
     229. Slater G
     230. Smit AF
     231. Stupka E
     232. Szustakowki J
     233. Thierry-Mieg D
     234. Thierry-Mieg J
     235. Wagner L
     236. Wallis J
     237. Wheeler R
     238. Williams A
     239. Wolf YI
     240. Wolfe KH
     241. Yang SP
     242. Yeh RF
     243. Collins F
     244. Guyer MS
     245. Peterson J
     246. Felsenfeld A
     247. Wetterstrand KA
     248. Patrinos A
     249. Morgan MJ
     250. de Jong P
     251. Catanese JJ
     252. Osoegawa K
     253. Shizuya H
     254. Choi S
     255. Chen YJ
     256. Szustakowki J
     257. International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium

     (2001) Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome

     Nature 409:860–921.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/35057062

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
151. 1. Leehey MA
     2. Munhoz RP
     3. Lang AE
     4. Brunberg JA
     5. Grigsby J
     6. Greco C
     7. Jacquemont S
     8. Tassone F
     9. Lozano AM
     10. Hagerman PJ
     11. Hagerman RJ

     (2003) The fragile X premutation presenting as essential tremor

     Archives of Neurology 60:117–121.

     https://doi.org/10.1001/archneur.60.1.117

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
152. 1. Levdansky E
     2. Romano J
     3. Shadkchan Y
     4. Sharon H
     5. Verstrepen KJ
     6. Fink GR
     7. Osherov N

     (2007) Coding tandem repeats generate diversity in Aspergillus fumigatus genes

     Eukaryotic Cell 6:1380–1391.

     https://doi.org/10.1128/EC.00229-06

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
153. 1. Li JJ
     2. Chew GL
     3. Biggin MD

     (2017) Quantitating translational control: mRNA abundance-dependent and independent contributions and the mRNA sequences that specify them

     Nucleic Acids Research 45:11821–11836.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkx898

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
154. 1. Lian Y
     2. Garner HR

     (2005) Evidence for the regulation of alternative splicing via complementary DNA sequence repeats

     Bioinformatics 21:1358–1364.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/bti180

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
155. 1. Lim LP
     2. Sharp PA

     (1998) Alternative splicing of the fibronectin EIIIB exon depends on specific TGCATG repeats

     Molecular and Cellular Biology 18:3900–3906.

     https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.18.7.3900

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
156. 1. Liquori CL
     2. Ricker K
     3. Moseley ML
     4. Jacobsen JF
     5. Kress W
     6. Naylor SL
     7. Day JW
     8. Ranum LPW

     (2001) Myotonic dystrophy type 2 caused by a CCTG expansion in intron 1 of ZNF9

     Science 293:864–867.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1062125

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
157. 1. Liquori CL
     2. Ikeda Y
     3. Weatherspoon M
     4. Ricker K
     5. Schoser BGH
     6. Dalton JC
     7. Day JW
     8. Ranum LPW

     (2003) Myotonic dystrophy type 2: human founder haplotype and evolutionary conservation of the repeat tract

     American Journal of Human Genetics 73:849–862.

     https://doi.org/10.1086/378720

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
158. 1. Liu Q
     2. Zhang K
     3. Kang Y
     4. Li Y
     5. Deng P
     6. Li Y
     7. Tian Y
     8. Sun Q
     9. Tang Y
     10. Xu K
     11. Zhou Y
     12. Wang J-L
     13. Guo J
     14. Li J-D
     15. Xia K
     16. Meng Q
     17. Allen EG
     18. Wen Z
     19. Li Z
     20. Jiang H
     21. Shen L
     22. Duan R
     23. Yao B
     24. Tang B
     25. Jin P
     26. Pan Y

     (2022) Expression of expanded GGC repeats within NOTCH2NLC causes behavioral deficits and neurodegeneration in a mouse model of neuronal intranuclear inclusion disease

     Science Advances 8:eadd6391.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.add6391

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
159. 1. López Castel A
     2. Nakamori M
     3. Tomé S
     4. Chitayat D
     5. Gourdon G
     6. Thornton CA
     7. Pearson CE

     (2011) Expanded CTG repeat demarcates a boundary for abnormal CpG methylation in myotonic dystrophy patient tissues

     Human Molecular Genetics 20:1–15.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddq427

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
160. 1. López-Martínez A
     2. Soblechero-Martín P
     3. de-la-Puente-Ovejero L
     4. Nogales-Gadea G
     5. Arechavala-Gomeza V

     (2020) An overview of alternative splicing defects implicated in myotonic dystrophy type I

     Genes 11:1109.

     https://doi.org/10.3390/genes11091109

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
161. 1. Lu JY
     2. Chang L
     3. Li T
     4. Wang T
     5. Yin Y
     6. Zhan G
     7. Han X
     8. Zhang K
     9. Tao Y
     10. Percharde M
     11. Wang L
     12. Peng Q
     13. Yan P
     14. Zhang H
     15. Bi X
     16. Shao W
     17. Hong Y
     18. Wu Z
     19. Ma R
     20. Wang P
     21. Li W
     22. Zhang J
     23. Chang Z
     24. Hou Y
     25. Zhu B
     26. Ramalho-Santos M
     27. Li P
     28. Xie W
     29. Na J
     30. Sun Y
     31. Shen X

     (2021) Homotypic clustering of L1 and B1/alu repeats compartmentalizes the 3D genome

     Cell Research 31:613–630.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41422-020-00466-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
162. 1. Lubs HA

     (1969)

     A marker X chromosome

     American Journal of Human Genetics 21:231–244.

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
163. 1. Ma L
     2. Herren AW
     3. Espinal G
     4. Randol J
     5. McLaughlin B
     6. Martinez-Cerdeño V
     7. Pessah IN
     8. Hagerman RJ
     9. Hagerman PJ

     (2019) Composition of the intranuclear inclusions of fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

     Acta Neuropathologica Communications 7:143.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-019-0796-1

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
164. 1. MacDonald ME
     2. Ambrose CM
     3. Duyao MP
     4. Myers RH
     5. Lin C
     6. Srinidhi L
     7. Barnes G
     8. Taylor SA
     9. James M
     10. Groot N
     11. MacFarlane H
     12. Jenkins B
     13. Anderson MA
     14. Wexler NS
     15. Gusella JF
     16. Bates GP
     17. Baxendale S
     18. Hummerich H
     19. Kirby S
     20. North M
     21. Youngman S
     22. Mott R
     23. Zehetner G
     24. Sedlacek Z
     25. Poustka A
     26. Frischauf AM
     27. Lehrach H
     28. Buckler AJ
     29. Church D
     30. Doucette-Stamm L
     31. O’Donovan MC
     32. Riba-Ramirez L
     33. Shah M
     34. Stanton VP
     35. Strobel SA
     36. Draths KM
     37. Wales JL
     38. Dervan P
     39. Housman DE
     40. Altherr M
     41. Shiang R
     42. Thompson L
     43. Fielder T
     44. Wasmuth JJ
     45. Tagle D
     46. Valdes J
     47. Elmer L
     48. Allard M
     49. Castilla L
     50. Swaroop M
     51. Blanchard K
     52. Collins FS
     53. Snell R
     54. Holloway T
     55. Gillespie K
     56. Datson N
     57. Shaw D
     58. Harper PS

     (1993) A novel gene containing A trinucleotide repeat that is expanded and unstable on huntington’s disease chromosomes: the huntington’s disease collaborative research group

     Cell 72:971–983.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(93)90585-e

     • Google Scholar
165. 1. Mahadevan M
     2. Tsilfidis C
     3. Sabourin L
     4. Shutler G
     5. Amemiya C
     6. Jansen G
     7. Neville C
     8. Narang M
     9. Barceló J
     10. O’Hoy K

     (1992) Myotonic dystrophy mutation: an unstable CTG repeat in the 3’ untranslated region of the gene

     Science 255:1253–1255.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1546325

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
166. 1. Mailick MR
     2. Hong J
     3. Rathouz P
     4. Baker MW
     5. Greenberg JS
     6. Smith L
     7. Maenner M

     (2014) Low-normal FMR1 CGG repeat length: phenotypic associations

     Frontiers in Genetics 5:309.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2014.00309

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
167. 1. Malgowska M
     2. Gudanis D
     3. Kierzek R
     4. Wyszko E
     5. Gabelica V
     6. Gdaniec Z

     (2014) Distinctive structural motifs of RNA G-quadruplexes composed of AGG, CGG and UGG trinucleotide repeats

     Nucleic Acids Research 42:10196–10207.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku710

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
168. 1. Malik I
     2. Kelley CP
     3. Wang ET
     4. Todd PK

     (2021a) Molecular mechanisms underlying nucleotide repeat expansion disorders

     Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology 22:589–607.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-021-00382-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
169. 1. Malik I
     2. Tseng YJ
     3. Wright SE
     4. Zheng K
     5. Ramaiyer P
     6. Green KM
     7. Todd PK

     (2021b) SRSF protein kinase 1 modulates RAN translation and suppresses CGG repeat toxicity

     EMBO Molecular Medicine 13:e14163.

     https://doi.org/10.15252/emmm.202114163

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
170. 1. Mallick S
     2. Li H
     3. Lipson M
     4. Mathieson I
     5. Gymrek M
     6. Racimo F
     7. Zhao M
     8. Chennagiri N
     9. Nordenfelt S
     10. Tandon A
     11. Skoglund P
     12. Lazaridis I
     13. Sankararaman S
     14. Fu Q
     15. Rohland N
     16. Renaud G
     17. Erlich Y
     18. Willems T
     19. Gallo C
     20. Spence JP
     21. Song YS
     22. Poletti G
     23. Balloux F
     24. van Driem G
     25. de Knijff P
     26. Romero IG
     27. Jha AR
     28. Behar DM
     29. Bravi CM
     30. Capelli C
     31. Hervig T
     32. Moreno-Estrada A
     33. Posukh OL
     34. Balanovska E
     35. Balanovsky O
     36. Karachanak-Yankova S
     37. Sahakyan H
     38. Toncheva D
     39. Yepiskoposyan L
     40. Tyler-Smith C
     41. Xue Y
     42. Abdullah MS
     43. Ruiz-Linares A
     44. Beall CM
     45. Di Rienzo A
     46. Jeong C
     47. Starikovskaya EB
     48. Metspalu E
     49. Parik J
     50. Villems R
     51. Henn BM
     52. Hodoglugil U
     53. Mahley R
     54. Sajantila A
     55. Stamatoyannopoulos G
     56. Wee JTS
     57. Khusainova R
     58. Khusnutdinova E
     59. Litvinov S
     60. Ayodo G
     61. Comas D
     62. Hammer MF
     63. Kivisild T
     64. Klitz W
     65. Winkler CA
     66. Labuda D
     67. Bamshad M
     68. Jorde LB
     69. Tishkoff SA
     70. Watkins WS
     71. Metspalu M
     72. Dryomov S
     73. Sukernik R
     74. Singh L
     75. Thangaraj K
     76. Pääbo S
     77. Kelso J
     78. Patterson N
     79. Reich D

     (2016) The simons genome diversity project: 300 genomes from 142 diverse populations

     Nature 538:201–206.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18964

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
171. 1. Maltby CJ
     2. Schofield JPR
     3. Houghton SD
     4. O’Kelly I
     5. Vargas-Caballero M
     6. Deinhardt K
     7. Coldwell MJ

     (2020) A 5′ UTR Ggn repeat controls localisation and translation of a potassium leak channel mRNA through G-quadruplex formation

     Nucleic Acids Research 48:9822–9839.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkaa699

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
172. 1. Mankodi A
     2. Urbinati CR
     3. Yuan QP
     4. Moxley RT
     5. Sansone V
     6. Krym M
     7. Henderson D
     8. Schalling M
     9. Swanson MS
     10. Thornton CA

     (2001) Muscleblind localizes to nuclear foci of aberrant RNA in myotonic dystrophy types 1 and 2

     Human Molecular Genetics 10:2165–2170.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/10.19.2165

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
173. 1. Marcotte EM
     2. Pellegrini M
     3. Yeates TO
     4. Eisenberg D

     (1999) A census of protein repeats

     Journal of Molecular Biology 293:151–160.

     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1999.3136

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
174. 1. Martin JP
     2. Bell J

     (1943) A pedigree of mental defect showing sex-linkage

     Journal of Neurology and Psychiatry 6:154–157.

     https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.6.3-4.154

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
175. 1. Mastroyiannopoulos NP
     2. Shammas C
     3. Phylactou LA

     (2010) Tackling the pathogenesis of RNA nuclear retention in myotonic dystrophy

     Biology of the Cell 102:515–523.

     https://doi.org/10.1042/BC20100040

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
176. 1. May S
     2. Hornburg D
     3. Schludi MH
     4. Arzberger T
     5. Rentzsch K
     6. Schwenk BM
     7. Grässer FA
     8. Mori K
     9. Kremmer E
     10. Banzhaf-Strathmann J
     11. Mann M
     12. Meissner F
     13. Edbauer D

     (2014) C9Orf72 FTLD/ALS-associated Gly-Ala dipeptide repeat proteins cause neuronal toxicity and UNC119 sequestration

     Acta Neuropathologica 128:485–503.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-014-1329-4

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
177. 1. McClintock B

     (1950) The origin and behavior of mutable loci in maize

     PNAS 36:344–355.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.36.6.344

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
178. 1. McConkie-Rosell A
     2. Lachiewicz AM
     3. Spiridigliozzi GA
     4. Tarleton J
     5. Schoenwald S
     6. Phelan MC
     7. Goonewardena P
     8. Ding X
     9. Brown WT

     (1993)

     Evidence that methylation of the FMR-I locus is responsible for variable phenotypic expression of the fragile X syndrome

     American Journal of Human Genetics 53:800–809.

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
179. 1. McEachin ZT
     2. Gendron TF
     3. Raj N
     4. García-Murias M
     5. Banerjee A
     6. Purcell RH
     7. Ward PJ
     8. Todd TW
     9. Merritt-Garza ME
     10. Jansen-West K
     11. Hales CM
     12. García-Sobrino T
     13. Quintáns B
     14. Holler CJ
     15. Taylor G
     16. San Millán B
     17. Teijeira S
     18. Yamashita T
     19. Ohkubo R
     20. Boulis NM
     21. Xu C
     22. Wen Z
     23. Streichenberger N
     24. Fogel BL
     25. Kukar T
     26. Abe K
     27. Dickson DW
     28. Arias M
     29. Glass JD
     30. Jiang J
     31. Tansey MG
     32. Sobrido M-J
     33. Petrucelli L
     34. Rossoll W
     35. Bassell GJ
     36. Neuro–CEB Neuropathology Network

     (2020) Chimeric peptide species contribute to divergent dipeptide repeat pathology in c9als/FTD and SCA36

     Neuron 107:292–305.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2020.04.011

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
180. 1. McIver LJ
     2. Fondon JW
     3. Skinner MA
     4. Garner HR

     (2011) Evaluation of microsatellite variation in the 1000 genomes project pilot studies is indicative of the quality and utility of the RAW data and alignments

     Genomics 97:193–199.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ygeno.2011.01.001

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
181. 1. McIver LJ
     2. McCormick JF
     3. Martin A
     4. Fondon JW
     5. Garner HR

     (2013) Population-scale analysis of human microsatellites reveals novel sources of exonic variation

     Gene 516:328–334.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gene.2012.12.068

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
182. 1. Menzies FM
     2. Huebener J
     3. Renna M
     4. Bonin M
     5. Riess O
     6. Rubinsztein DC

     (2010) Autophagy induction reduces mutant ataxin-3 levels and toxicity in a mouse model of spinocerebellar ataxia type 3

     Brain 133:93–104.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awp292

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
183. 1. Miller JW
     2. Urbinati CR
     3. Teng-Umnuay P
     4. Stenberg MG
     5. Byrne BJ
     6. Thornton CA
     7. Swanson MS

     (2000) Recruitment of human muscleblind proteins to (CUG) (N) expansions associated with myotonic dystrophy

     The EMBO Journal 19:4439–4448.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/19.17.4439

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
184. 1. Millette MM
     2. Holland ED
     3. Tenpas TJ
     4. Dent EW

     (2022) A single transcript knockdown-replacement strategy employing 5’ UTR secondary structures to precisely titrate rescue protein translation

     Frontiers in Genome Editing 4:803375.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fgeed.2022.803375

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
185. 1. Mitra I
     2. Huang B
     3. Mousavi N
     4. Ma N
     5. Lamkin M
     6. Yanicky R
     7. Shleizer-Burko S
     8. Lohmueller KE
     9. Gymrek M

     (2021) Patterns of de novo tandem repeat mutations and their role in autism

     Nature 589:246–250.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-03078-7

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
186. 1. Mitsuhashi S
     2. Matsumoto N

     (2020) Long-Read sequencing for rare human genetic diseases

     Journal of Human Genetics 65:11–19.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-019-0671-8

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
187. 1. Mizielinska S
     2. Grönke S
     3. Niccoli T
     4. Ridler CE
     5. Clayton EL
     6. Devoy A
     7. Moens T
     8. Norona FE
     9. Woollacott IOC
     10. Pietrzyk J
     11. Cleverley K
     12. Nicoll AJ
     13. Pickering-Brown S
     14. Dols J
     15. Cabecinha M
     16. Hendrich O
     17. Fratta P
     18. Fisher EMC
     19. Partridge L
     20. Isaacs AM

     (2014) C9Orf72 repeat expansions cause neurodegeneration in Drosophila through arginine-rich proteins

     Science 345:1192–1194.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1256800

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
188. 1. Mojarad BA
     2. Engchuan W
     3. Trost B
     4. Backstrom I
     5. Yin Y
     6. Thiruvahindrapuram B
     7. Pallotto L
     8. Mitina A
     9. Khan M
     10. Pellecchia G
     11. Haque B
     12. Guo K
     13. Heung T
     14. Costain G
     15. Scherer SW
     16. Marshall CR
     17. Pearson CE
     18. Bassett AS
     19. Yuen RKC

     (2022) Genome-Wide tandem repeat expansions contribute to schizophrenia risk

     Molecular Psychiatry 27:3692–3698.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-022-01575-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
189. 1. Montie HL
     2. Cho MS
     3. Holder L
     4. Liu Y
     5. Tsvetkov AS
     6. Finkbeiner S
     7. Merry DE

     (2009) Cytoplasmic retention of polyglutamine-expanded androgen receptor ameliorates disease via autophagy in a mouse model of spinal and bulbar muscular atrophy

     Human Molecular Genetics 18:1937–1950.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddp115

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
190. 1. Mori K
     2. Arzberger T
     3. Grässer FA
     4. Gijselinck I
     5. May S
     6. Rentzsch K
     7. Weng SM
     8. Schludi MH
     9. van der Zee J
     10. Cruts M
     11. Van Broeckhoven C
     12. Kremmer E
     13. Kretzschmar HA
     14. Haass C
     15. Edbauer D

     (2013a) Bidirectional transcripts of the expanded c9orf72 hexanucleotide repeat are translated into aggregating dipeptide repeat proteins

     Acta Neuropathologica 126:881–893.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00401-013-1189-3

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
191. 1. Mori K
     2. Weng SM
     3. Arzberger T
     4. May S
     5. Rentzsch K
     6. Kremmer E
     7. Schmid B
     8. Kretzschmar HA
     9. Cruts M
     10. Van Broeckhoven C
     11. Haass C
     12. Edbauer D

     (2013b) The c9orf72 GGGGCC repeat is translated into aggregating dipeptide-repeat proteins in FTLD/ALS

     Science 339:1335–1338.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1232927

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
192. 1. Moseley ML
     2. Zu T
     3. Ikeda Y
     4. Gao W
     5. Mosemiller AK
     6. Daughters RS
     7. Chen G
     8. Weatherspoon MR
     9. Clark HB
     10. Ebner TJ
     11. Day JW
     12. Ranum LPW

     (2006) Bidirectional expression of CUG and CAG expansion transcripts and intranuclear polyglutamine inclusions in spinocerebellar ataxia type 8

     Nature Genetics 38:758–769.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1827

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
193. 1. Mulley JC
     2. Yu S
     3. Loesch DZ
     4. Hay DA
     5. Donnelly A
     6. Gedeon AK
     7. Carbonell P
     8. López I
     9. Glover G
     10. Gabarrón I

     (1995) Fraxe and mental retardation

     Journal of Medical Genetics 32:162–169.

     https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.32.3.162

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
194. 1. Muro AF
     2. Caputi M
     3. Pariyarath R
     4. Pagani F
     5. Buratti E
     6. Baralle FE

     (1999) Regulation of fibronectin EDA exon alternative splicing: possible role of RNA secondary structure for enhancer display

     Molecular and Cellular Biology 19:2657–2671.

     https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.19.4.2657

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
195. 1. Murray A
     2. Ennis S
     3. MacSwiney F
     4. Webb J
     5. Morton NE

     (2000a) Reproductive and menstrual history of females with fragile X expansions

     European Journal of Human Genetics 8:247–252.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejhg.5200451

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
196. 1. Murray A
     2. Ennis S
     3. Morton N

     (2000b) No evidence for parent of origin influencing premature ovarian failure in fragile X premutation carriers

     American Journal of Human Genetics 67:253–254.

     https://doi.org/10.1086/302963

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
197. 1. Muslimov IA
     2. Patel MV
     3. Rose A
     4. Tiedge H

     (2011) Spatial code recognition in neuronal RNA targeting: role of RNA-hnrnp A2 interactions

     The Journal of Cell Biology 194:441–457.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201010027

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
198. 1. Mykowska A
     2. Sobczak K
     3. Wojciechowska M
     4. Kozlowski P
     5. Krzyzosiak WJ

     (2011) Cag repeats mimic CUG repeats in the misregulation of alternative splicing

     Nucleic Acids Research 39:8938–8951.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr608

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
199. 1. Myrick LK
     2. Nakamoto-Kinoshita M
     3. Lindor NM
     4. Kirmani S
     5. Cheng X
     6. Warren ST

     (2014) Fragile X syndrome due to a missense mutation

     European Journal of Human Genetics 22:1185–1189.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2013.311

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
200. 1. Nakamura H
     2. Doi H
     3. Mitsuhashi S
     4. Miyatake S
     5. Katoh K
     6. Frith MC
     7. Asano T
     8. Kudo Y
     9. Ikeda T
     10. Kubota S
     11. Kunii M
     12. Kitazawa Y
     13. Tada M
     14. Okamoto M
     15. Joki H
     16. Takeuchi H
     17. Matsumoto N
     18. Tanaka F

     (2020) Long-Read sequencing identifies the pathogenic nucleotide repeat expansion in RFC1 in a Japanese case of canvas

     Journal of Human Genetics 65:475–480.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-020-0733-y

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
201. 1. Nasrallah MP
     2. Cho G
     3. Simonet JC
     4. Putt ME
     5. Kitamura K
     6. Golden JA

     (2012) Differential effects of a polyalanine tract expansion in Arx on neural development and gene expression

     Human Molecular Genetics 21:1090–1098.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddr538

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
202. 1. Neueder A
     2. Landles C
     3. Ghosh R
     4. Howland D
     5. Myers RH
     6. Faull RLM
     7. Tabrizi SJ
     8. Bates GP

     (2017) The pathogenic exon 1 HTT protein is produced by incomplete splicing in huntington’s disease patients

     Scientific Reports 7:1307.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-01510-z

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
203. 1. Neueder A
     2. Dumas AA
     3. Benjamin AC
     4. Bates GP

     (2018) Regulatory mechanisms of incomplete huntingtin mrna splicing

     Nature Communications 9:3955.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-06281-3

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
204. 1. Niederer RO
     2. Rojas-Duran MF
     3. Zinshteyn B
     4. Gilbert WV

     (2022) Direct analysis of ribosome targeting illuminates thousand-fold regulation of translation initiation

     Cell Systems 13:256–264.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cels.2021.12.002

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
205. 1. Nikumbh S
     2. Pfeifer N

     (2017) Genetic sequence-based prediction of long-range chromatin interactions suggests a potential role of short tandem repeat sequences in genome organization

     BMC Bioinformatics 18:218.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/s12859-017-1624-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
206. 1. Oberlé I
     2. Rousseau F
     3. Heitz D
     4. Kretz C
     5. Devys D
     6. Hanauer A
     7. Boué J
     8. Bertheas MF
     9. Mandel JL

     (1991) Instability of a 550-base pair DNA segment and abnormal methylation in fragile X syndrome

     Science 252:1097–1102.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.252.5009.1097

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
207. 1. O’Dushlaine CT
     2. Shields DC

     (2008) Marked variation in predicted and observed variability of tandem repeat loci across the human genome

     BMC Genomics 9:175.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-9-175

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
208. 1. Ogasawara M
     2. Iida A
     3. Kumutpongpanich T
     4. Ozaki A
     5. Oya Y
     6. Konishi H
     7. Nakamura A
     8. Abe R
     9. Takai H
     10. Hanajima R
     11. Doi H
     12. Tanaka F
     13. Nakamura H
     14. Nonaka I
     15. Wang Z
     16. Hayashi S
     17. Noguchi S
     18. Nishino I

     (2020) Cgg expansion in NOTCH2NLC is associated with oculopharyngodistal myopathy with neurological manifestations

     Acta Neuropathologica Communications 8:204.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-020-01084-4

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
209. 1. Oh SY
     2. He F
     3. Krans A
     4. Frazer M
     5. Taylor JP
     6. Paulson HL
     7. Todd PK

     (2015) Ran translation at CGG repeats induces ubiquitin proteasome system impairment in models of fragile X-associated tremor ataxia syndrome

     Human Molecular Genetics 24:4317–4326.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddv165

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
210. 1. Okubo M
     2. Doi H
     3. Fukai R
     4. Fujita A
     5. Mitsuhashi S
     6. Hashiguchi S
     7. Kishida H
     8. Ueda N
     9. Morihara K
     10. Ogasawara A
     11. Kawamoto Y
     12. Takahashi T
     13. Takahashi K
     14. Nakamura H
     15. Kunii M
     16. Tada M
     17. Katsumoto A
     18. Fukuda H
     19. Mizuguchi T
     20. Miyatake S
     21. Miyake N
     22. Suzuki J
     23. Ito Y
     24. Sone J
     25. Sobue G
     26. Takeuchi H
     27. Matsumoto N
     28. Tanaka F

     (2019) Ggc repeat expansion of NOTCH2NLC in adult patients with leukoencephalopathy

     Annals of Neurology 86:962–968.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.25586

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
211. 1. Ordway JM
     2. Tallaksen-Greene S
     3. Gutekunst CA
     4. Bernstein EM
     5. Cearley JA
     6. Wiener HW
     7. Dure LS
     8. Lindsey R
     9. Hersch SM
     10. Jope RS
     11. Albin RL
     12. Detloff PJ

     (1997) Ectopically expressed CAG repeats cause intranuclear inclusions and a progressive late onset neurological phenotype in the mouse

     Cell 91:753–763.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(00)80464-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
212. 1. Orr HT

     (2012) Polyglutamine neurodegeneration: expanded glutamines enhance native functions

     Current Opinion in Genetics & Development 22:251–255.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2012.01.001

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
213. 1. Osadchuk L
     2. Vasiliev G
     3. Kleshchev M
     4. Osadchuk A

     (2022) Androgen receptor gene CAG repeat length varies and affects semen quality in an ethnic-specific fashion in young men from russia

     International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23:10594.

     https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms231810594

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
214. 1. Otten AD
     2. Tapscott SJ

     (1995) Triplet repeat expansion in myotonic dystrophy alters the adjacent chromatin structure

     PNAS 92:5465–5469.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.92.12.5465

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
215. 1. Palazzolo I
     2. Burnett BG
     3. Young JE
     4. Brenne PL
     5. La Spada AR
     6. Fischbeck KH
     7. Howell BW
     8. Pennuto M

     (2007) Akt blocks ligand binding and protects against expanded polyglutamine androgen receptor toxicity

     Human Molecular Genetics 16:1593–1603.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddm109

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
216. 1. Pan B
     2. Li R
     3. Chen Y
     4. Tang Q
     5. Wu W
     6. Chen L
     7. Lu C
     8. Pan F
     9. Ding H
     10. Xia Y
     11. Hu L
     12. Chen D
     13. Sha J
     14. Wang X

     (2016) Genetic association between androgen receptor gene CAG repeat length polymorphism and male infertility

     Medicine 95:e2878.

     https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002878

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
217. 1. Pappalardo XG
     2. Barra V

     (2021) Losing DNA methylation at repetitive elements and breaking bad

     Epigenetics & Chromatin 14:25.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/s13072-021-00400-z

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
218. 1. Pascual M
     2. Vicente M
     3. Monferrer L
     4. Artero R

     (2006) The muscleblind family of proteins: an emerging class of regulators of developmentally programmed alternative splicing

     Differentiation; Research in Biological Diversity 74:65–80.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1432-0436.2006.00060.x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
219. 1. Pastori C
     2. Peschansky VJ
     3. Barbouth D
     4. Mehta A
     5. Silva JP
     6. Wahlestedt C

     (2014) Comprehensive analysis of the transcriptional landscape of the human FMR1 gene reveals two new long noncoding rnas differentially expressed in fragile X syndrome and fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

     Human Genetics 133:59–67.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-013-1356-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
220. 1. Patel PK
     2. Bhavesh NS
     3. Hosur RV

     (2000) Cation-Dependent conformational switches in d-TGGCGGC containing two triplet repeats of fragile X syndrome: NMR observations

     Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 278:833–838.

     https://doi.org/10.1006/bbrc.2000.3878

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
221. 1. Paul S
     2. Dansithong W
     3. Jog SP
     4. Holt I
     5. Mittal S
     6. Brook JD
     7. Morris GE
     8. Comai L
     9. Reddy S

     (2011) Expanded CUG repeats Dysregulate RNA splicing by altering the stoichiometry of the muscleblind 1 complex

     The Journal of Biological Chemistry 286:38427–38438.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M111.255224

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
222. 1. Paulson HL
     2. Perez MK
     3. Trottier Y
     4. Trojanowski JQ
     5. Subramony SH
     6. Das SS
     7. Vig P
     8. Mandel JL
     9. Fischbeck KH
     10. Pittman RN

     (1997) Intranuclear inclusions of expanded polyglutamine protein in spinocerebellar ataxia type 3

     Neuron 19:333–344.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80943-5

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
223. Book

     1. Paulson H

     (2018) Chapter 9 - Repeat expansion diseases

     In: Geschwind DH, Paulson HL, Klein C, editors. Handbook of Clinical Neurology, Neurogenetics, Part I. Elsevier. pp. 105–123.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-63233-3.00009-9

     • Google Scholar
224. 1. Payseur BA
     2. Jing P
     3. Haasl RJ

     (2011) A genomic portrait of human microsatellite variation

     Molecular Biology and Evolution 28:303–312.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msq198

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
225. 1. Philips AV
     2. Timchenko LT
     3. Cooper TA

     (1998) Disruption of splicing regulated by a CUG-binding protein in myotonic dystrophy

     Science 280:737–741.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.280.5364.737

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
226. 1. Pieretti M
     2. Zhang FP
     3. Fu YH
     4. Warren ST
     5. Oostra BA
     6. Caskey CT
     7. Nelson DL

     (1991) Absence of expression of the FMR-1 gene in fragile X syndrome

     Cell 66:817–822.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(91)90125-i

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
227. 1. Prado F
     2. Piruat JI
     3. Aguilera A

     (1997) Recombination between DNA repeats in yeast hpr1Delta cells is linked to transcription elongation

     The EMBO Journal 16:2826–2835.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/16.10.2826

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
228. 1. Proops R
     2. Webb T

     (1981) The “ fragile ” X chromosome in the martin-bell-renpenning syndrome and in males with other forms of familial mental retardation

     Journal of Medical Genetics 18:366–373.

     https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.18.5.366

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
229. 1. Quartier A
     2. Poquet H
     3. Gilbert-Dussardier B
     4. Rossi M
     5. Casteleyn AS
     6. Portes V
     7. Feger C
     8. Nourisson E
     9. Kuentz P
     10. Redin C
     11. Thevenon J
     12. Mosca-Boidron AL
     13. Callier P
     14. Muller J
     15. Lesca G
     16. Huet F
     17. Geoffroy V
     18. El Chehadeh S
     19. Jung M
     20. Trojak B
     21. Le Gras S
     22. Lehalle D
     23. Jost B
     24. Maury S
     25. Masurel A
     26. Edery P
     27. Thauvin-Robinet C
     28. Gérard B
     29. Mandel JL
     30. Faivre L
     31. Piton A

     (2017) Intragenic FMR1 disease-causing variants: a significant mutational mechanism leading to fragile-X syndrome

     European Journal of Human Genetics 25:423–431.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2016.204

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
230. 1. Quilez J
     2. Guilmatre A
     3. Garg P
     4. Highnam G
     5. Gymrek M
     6. Erlich Y
     7. Joshi RS
     8. Mittelman D
     9. Sharp AJ

     (2016) Polymorphic tandem repeats within gene promoters act as modifiers of gene expression and DNA methylation in humans

     Nucleic Acids Research 44:3750–3762.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw219

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
231. 1. Qurashi A
     2. Li W
     3. Zhou JY
     4. Peng J
     5. Jin P

     (2011) Nuclear accumulation of stress response mRNAs contributes to the neurodegeneration caused by fragile X premutation rCGG repeats

     PLOS Genetics 7:e1002102.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1002102

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
232. 1. Ravikumar B
     2. Vacher C
     3. Berger Z
     4. Davies JE
     5. Luo S
     6. Oroz LG
     7. Scaravilli F
     8. Easton DF
     9. Duden R
     10. O’Kane CJ
     11. Rubinsztein DC

     (2004) Inhibition of mTOR induces autophagy and reduces toxicity of polyglutamine expansions in fly and mouse models of Huntington disease

     Nature Genetics 36:585–595.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1362

     • Google Scholar
233. 1. Ravindran S

     (2012) Barbara mcclintock and the discovery of jumping genes

     PNAS 109:20198–20199.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1219372109

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
234. 1. Rodriguez CM
     2. Todd PK

     (2019) New pathologic mechanisms in nucleotide repeat expansion disorders

     Neurobiology of Disease 130:104515.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nbd.2019.104515

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
235. 1. Rodriguez CM
     2. Wright SE
     3. Kearse MG
     4. Haenfler JM
     5. Flores BN
     6. Liu Y
     7. Ifrim MF
     8. Glineburg MR
     9. Krans A
     10. Jafar-Nejad P
     11. Sutton MA
     12. Bassell GJ
     13. Parent JM
     14. Rigo F
     15. Barmada SJ
     16. Todd PK

     (2020) A native function for RAN translation and CGG repeats in regulating fragile X protein synthesis

     Nature Neuroscience 23:386–397.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41593-020-0590-1

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
236. 1. Rosas I
     2. Martínez C
     3. Clarimón J
     4. Lleó A
     5. Illán-Gala I
     6. Dols-Icardo O
     7. Borroni B
     8. Almeida MR
     9. van der Zee J
     10. Van Broeckhoven C
     11. Bruni AC
     12. Anfossi M
     13. Bernardi L
     14. Maletta R
     15. Serpente M
     16. Galimberti D
     17. Scarpini E
     18. Rossi G
     19. Caroppo P
     20. Benussi L
     21. Ghidoni R
     22. Binetti G
     23. Nacmias B
     24. Sorbi S
     25. Piaceri I
     26. Bagnoli S
     27. Antonell A
     28. Sánchez-Valle R
     29. De la Casa-Fages B
     30. Grandas F
     31. Diez-Fairen M
     32. Pastor P
     33. Ferrari R
     34. Álvarez V
     35. Menéndez-González M

     (2020) Role for ATXN1, ATXN2, and HTT intermediate repeats in frontotemporal dementia and alzheimer’s disease

     Neurobiology of Aging 87:139.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neurobiolaging.2019.10.017

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
237. 1. Rubinsztein DC

     (2006) The roles of intracellular protein-degradation pathways in neurodegeneration

     Nature 443:780–786.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05291

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
238. 1. Sathasivam K
     2. Neueder A
     3. Gipson TA
     4. Landles C
     5. Benjamin AC
     6. Bondulich MK
     7. Smith DL
     8. Faull RLM
     9. Roos RAC
     10. Howland D
     11. Detloff PJ
     12. Housman DE
     13. Bates GP

     (2013) Aberrant splicing of HTT generates the pathogenic exon 1 protein in huntington disease

     PNAS 110:2366–2370.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1221891110

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
239. 1. Sato N
     2. Amino T
     3. Kobayashi K
     4. Asakawa S
     5. Ishiguro T
     6. Tsunemi T
     7. Takahashi M
     8. Matsuura T
     9. Flanigan KM
     10. Iwasaki S
     11. Ishino F
     12. Saito Y
     13. Murayama S
     14. Yoshida M
     15. Hashizume Y
     16. Takahashi Y
     17. Tsuji S
     18. Shimizu N
     19. Toda T
     20. Ishikawa K
     21. Mizusawa H

     (2009) Spinocerebellar ataxia type 31 is associated with “ inserted ” penta-nucleotide repeats containing (TGGAA) N

     American Journal of Human Genetics 85:544–557.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2009.09.019

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
240. 1. Schaefer MH
     2. Wanker EE
     3. Andrade-Navarro MA

     (2012) Evolution and function of CAG/polyglutamine repeats in protein-protein interaction networks

     Nucleic Acids Research 40:4273–4287.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gks011

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
241. 1. Schilling G
     2. Becher MW
     3. Sharp AH
     4. Jinnah HA
     5. Duan K
     6. Kotzuk JA
     7. Slunt HH
     8. Ratovitski T
     9. Cooper JK
     10. Jenkins NA
     11. Copeland NG
     12. Price DL
     13. Ross CA
     14. Borchelt DR

     (1999) Intranuclear inclusions and neuritic aggregates in transgenic mice expressing a mutant N-terminal fragment of huntingtin

     Human Molecular Genetics 8:397–407.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/8.3.397

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
242. 1. Schwartz M
     2. Zlotorynski E
     3. Kerem B

     (2006) The molecular basis of common and rare fragile sites

     Cancer Letters 232:13–26.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2005.07.039

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
243. 1. Sellier C
     2. Rau F
     3. Liu Y
     4. Tassone F
     5. Hukema RK
     6. Gattoni R
     7. Schneider A
     8. Richard S
     9. Willemsen R
     10. Elliott DJ
     11. Hagerman PJ
     12. Charlet-Berguerand N

     (2010) Sam68 sequestration and partial loss of function are associated with splicing alterations in FXTAS patients

     The EMBO Journal 29:1248–1261.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2010.21

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
244. 1. Sellier C
     2. Freyermuth F
     3. Tabet R
     4. Tran T
     5. He F
     6. Ruffenach F
     7. Alunni V
     8. Moine H
     9. Thibault C
     10. Page A
     11. Tassone F
     12. Willemsen R
     13. Disney MD
     14. Hagerman PJ
     15. Todd PK
     16. Charlet-Berguerand N

     (2013) Sequestration of Drosha and DGCR8 by expanded CGG RNA repeats alters microRNA processing in fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

     Cell Reports 3:869–880.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2013.02.004

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
245. 1. Sellier C
     2. Buijsen RAM
     3. He F
     4. Natla S
     5. Jung L
     6. Tropel P
     7. Gaucherot A
     8. Jacobs H
     9. Meziane H
     10. Vincent A
     11. Champy M-F
     12. Sorg T
     13. Pavlovic G
     14. Wattenhofer-Donze M
     15. Birling M-C
     16. Oulad-Abdelghani M
     17. Eberling P
     18. Ruffenach F
     19. Joint M
     20. Anheim M
     21. Martinez-Cerdeno V
     22. Tassone F
     23. Willemsen R
     24. Hukema RK
     25. Viville S
     26. Martinat C
     27. Todd PK
     28. Charlet-Berguerand N

     (2017) Translation of expanded CGG repeats into fmrpolyg is pathogenic and may contribute to fragile X tremor ataxia syndrome

     Neuron 93:331–347.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2016.12.016

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
246. 1. Sellier C
     2. Cerro-Herreros E
     3. Blatter M
     4. Freyermuth F
     5. Gaucherot A
     6. Ruffenach F
     7. Sarkar P
     8. Puymirat J
     9. Udd B
     10. Day JW
     11. Meola G
     12. Bassez G
     13. Fujimura H
     14. Takahashi MP
     15. Schoser B
     16. Furling D
     17. Artero R
     18. Allain FHT
     19. Llamusi B
     20. Charlet-Berguerand N

     (2018) RbFOX1/MBNL1 competition for CCUG RNA repeats binding contributes to myotonic dystrophy type 1/type 2 differences

     Nature Communications 9:2009.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-04370-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
247. 1. Sharma M
     2. Pandey GK

     (2015) Expansion and function of repeat domain proteins during stress and development in plants

     Frontiers in Plant Science 6:1218.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.01218

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
248. 1. Sherman SL
     2. Morton NE
     3. Jacobs PA
     4. Turner G

     (1984) The marker (X) syndrome: a cytogenetic and genetic analysis

     Annals of Human Genetics 48:21–37.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-1809.1984.tb00830.x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
249. 1. Sherman SL
     2. Jacobs PA
     3. Morton NE
     4. Froster-Iskenius U
     5. Howard-Peebles PN
     6. Nielsen KB
     7. Partington MW
     8. Sutherland GR
     9. Turner G
     10. Watson M

     (1985) Further segregation analysis of the fragile X syndrome with special reference to transmitting males

     Human Genetics 69:289–299.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00291644

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
250. 1. Smith KP
     2. Byron M
     3. Johnson C
     4. Xing Y
     5. Lawrence JB

     (2007) Defining early steps in mRNA transport: mutant mRNA in myotonic dystrophy type I is blocked at entry into SC-35 domains

     The Journal of Cell Biology 178:951–964.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200706048

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
251. 1. Sobczak K.
     2. Mezer M
     3. Michlewski G
     4. Krol J
     5. Krzyzosiak WJ

     (2003) Rna structure of trinucleotide repeats associated with human neurological diseases

     Nucleic Acids Research 31:5469–5482.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkg766

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
252. 1. Sobczak K
     2. Michlewski G
     3. de Mezer M
     4. Kierzek E
     5. Krol J
     6. Olejniczak M
     7. Kierzek R
     8. Krzyzosiak WJ

     (2010) Structural diversity of triplet repeat rnas

     Journal of Biological Chemistry 285:12755–12764.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M109.078790

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
253. 1. Sofola OA
     2. Jin P
     3. Qin Y
     4. Duan R
     5. Liu H
     6. de Haro M
     7. Nelson DL
     8. Botas J

     (2007) Rna-Binding proteins hnRNP A2/B1 and CUGBP1 suppress fragile X CGG premutation repeat-induced neurodegeneration in a Drosophila model of FXTAS

     Neuron 55:565–571.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2007.07.021

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
254. 1. Solnick D
     2. Lee SI

     (1987) Amount of RNA secondary structure required to induce an alternative splice

     Molecular and Cellular Biology 7:3194–3198.

     https://doi.org/10.1128/mcb.7.9.3194-3198.1987

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
255. 1. Sone J
     2. Mitsuhashi S
     3. Fujita A
     4. Mizuguchi T
     5. Hamanaka K
     6. Mori K
     7. Koike H
     8. Hashiguchi A
     9. Takashima H
     10. Sugiyama H
     11. Kohno Y
     12. Takiyama Y
     13. Maeda K
     14. Doi H
     15. Koyano S
     16. Takeuchi H
     17. Kawamoto M
     18. Kohara N
     19. Ando T
     20. Ieda T
     21. Kita Y
     22. Kokubun N
     23. Tsuboi Y
     24. Katoh K
     25. Kino Y
     26. Katsuno M
     27. Iwasaki Y
     28. Yoshida M
     29. Tanaka F
     30. Suzuki IK
     31. Frith MC
     32. Matsumoto N
     33. Sobue G

     (2019) Long-Read sequencing identifies GGC repeat expansions in NOTCH2NLC associated with neuronal intranuclear inclusion disease

     Nature Genetics 51:1215–1221.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-019-0459-y

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
256. 1. Soragni E
     2. Petrosyan L
     3. Rinkoski TA
     4. Wieben ED
     5. Baratz KH
     6. Fautsch MP
     7. Gottesfeld JM

     (2018) Repeat-associated non-ATG (ran) translation in fuchs’ endothelial corneal dystrophy

     Investigative Opthalmology & Visual Science 59:1888.

     https://doi.org/10.1167/iovs.17-23265

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
257. 1. Steinbach P
     2. Gläser D
     3. Vogel W
     4. Wolf M
     5. Schwemmle S

     (1998) The DMPK gene of severely affected myotonic dystrophy patients is hypermethylated proximal to the largely expanded CTG repeat

     American Journal of Human Genetics 62:278–285.

     https://doi.org/10.1086/301711

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
258. 1. Strässer K
     2. Masuda S
     3. Mason P
     4. Pfannstiel J
     5. Oppizzi M
     6. Rodriguez-Navarro S
     7. Rondón AG
     8. Aguilera A
     9. Struhl K
     10. Reed R
     11. Hurt E

     (2002) Trex is a conserved complex coupling transcription with messenger RNA export

     Nature 417:304–308.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature746

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
259. 1. Subramanian PS
     2. Nelson DL
     3. Chinault AC

     (1996)

     Large domains of apparent delayed replication timing associated with triplet repeat expansion at FRAXA and FRAXE

     American Journal of Human Genetics 59:407–416.

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
260. 1. Sulovari A
     2. Li R
     3. Audano PA
     4. Porubsky D
     5. Vollger MR
     6. Logsdon GA
     7. Warren WC
     8. Pollen AA
     9. Chaisson MJP
     10. Eichler EE
     11. Human Genome Structural Variation Consortium

     (2019) Human-specific tandem repeat expansion and differential gene expression during primate evolution

     PNAS 116:23243–23253.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1912175116

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
261. 1. Sun X
     2. Li PP
     3. Zhu S
     4. Cohen R
     5. Marque LO
     6. Ross CA
     7. Pulst SM
     8. Chan HYE
     9. Margolis RL
     10. Rudnicki DD

     (2015) Nuclear retention of full-length HTT RNA is mediated by splicing factors MBNL1 and U2AF65

     Scientific Reports 5:12521.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/srep12521

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
262. 1. Sun JH
     2. Zhou L
     3. Emerson DJ
     4. Phyo SA
     5. Titus KR
     6. Gong W
     7. Gilgenast TG
     8. Beagan JA
     9. Davidson BL
     10. Tassone F
     11. Phillips-Cremins JE

     (2018) Disease-Associated short tandem repeats co-localize with chromatin domain boundaries

     Cell 175:224–238.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.005

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
263. 1. Sutcliffe JS
     2. Nelson DL
     3. Zhang F
     4. Pieretti M
     5. Caskey CT
     6. Saxe D
     7. Warren ST

     (1992) Dna methylation represses FMR-1 transcription in fragile X syndrome

     Human Molecular Genetics 1:397–400.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/1.6.397

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
264. 1. Tabet R
     2. Schaeffer L
     3. Freyermuth F
     4. Jambeau M
     5. Workman M
     6. Lee C-Z
     7. Lin C-C
     8. Jiang J
     9. Jansen-West K
     10. Abou-Hamdan H
     11. Désaubry L
     12. Gendron T
     13. Petrucelli L
     14. Martin F
     15. Lagier-Tourenne C

     (2018) CUG initiation and frameshifting enable production of dipeptide repeat proteins from ALS/FTD C9ORF72 transcripts

     Nature Communications 9:152.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-017-02643-5

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
265. 1. Tacke R
     2. Chen Y
     3. Manley JL

     (1997) Sequence-specific RNA binding by an SR protein requires RS domain phosphorylation: creation of an srp40-specific splicing enhancer

     PNAS 94:1148–1153.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.4.1148

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
266. 1. Tam V
     2. Patel N
     3. Turcotte M
     4. Bossé Y
     5. Paré G
     6. Meyre D

     (2019) Benefits and limitations of genome-wide association studies

     Nature Reviews. Genetics 20:467–484.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41576-019-0127-1

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
267. 1. Tassone F
     2. Hagerman RJ
     3. Loesch DZ
     4. Lachiewicz A
     5. Taylor AK
     6. Hagerman PJ

     (2000a) Fragile X males with unmethylated, full mutation trinucleotide repeat expansions have elevated levels of FMR1 messenger RNA

     American Journal of Medical Genetics 94:232–236.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/1096-8628(20000918)94:3<232::aid-ajmg9>3.0.co;2-h

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
268. 1. Tassone F
     2. Hagerman RJ
     3. Taylor AK
     4. Gane LW
     5. Godfrey TE
     6. Hagerman PJ

     (2000b) Elevated levels of FMR1 mrna in carrier males: a new mechanism of involvement in the fragile-X syndrome

     American Journal of Human Genetics 66:6–15.

     https://doi.org/10.1086/302720

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
269. 1. Tassone F
     2. Iwahashi C
     3. Hagerman PJ

     (2004) Fmr1 RNA within the intranuclear inclusions of fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome (FXTAS)

     RNA Biology 1:103–105.

     https://doi.org/10.4161/rna.1.2.1035

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
270. 1. Tassone F
     2. De Rubeis S
     3. Carosi C
     4. La Fata G
     5. Serpa G
     6. Raske C
     7. Willemsen R
     8. Hagerman PJ
     9. Bagni C

     (2011) Differential usage of transcriptional start sites and polyadenylation sites in FMR1 premutation alleles

     Nucleic Acids Research 39:6172–6185.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr100

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
271. 1. Thomas JD
     2. Sznajder ŁJ
     3. Bardhi O
     4. Aslam FN
     5. Anastasiadis ZP
     6. Scotti MM
     7. Nishino I
     8. Nakamori M
     9. Wang ET
     10. Swanson MS

     (2017) Disrupted prenatal RNA processing and myogenesis in congenital myotonic dystrophy

     Genes & Development 31:1122–1133.

     https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.300590.117

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
272. 1. Thomson JP
     2. Skene PJ
     3. Selfridge J
     4. Clouaire T
     5. Guy J
     6. Webb S
     7. Kerr ARW
     8. Deaton A
     9. Andrews R
     10. James KD
     11. Turner DJ
     12. Illingworth R
     13. Bird A

     (2010) Cpg islands influence chromatin structure via the CpG-binding protein cfp1

     Nature 464:1082–1086.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08924

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
273. 1. Tian Y
     2. Wang J-L
     3. Huang W
     4. Zeng S
     5. Jiao B
     6. Liu Z
     7. Chen Z
     8. Li Y
     9. Wang Y
     10. Min H-X
     11. Wang X-J
     12. You Y
     13. Zhang R-X
     14. Chen X-Y
     15. Yi F
     16. Zhou Y-F
     17. Long H-Y
     18. Zhou C-J
     19. Hou X
     20. Wang J-P
     21. Xie B
     22. Liang F
     23. Yang Z-Y
     24. Sun Q-Y
     25. Allen EG
     26. Shafik AM
     27. Kong HE
     28. Guo J-F
     29. Yan X-X
     30. Hu Z-M
     31. Xia K
     32. Jiang H
     33. Xu H-W
     34. Duan R-H
     35. Jin P
     36. Tang B-S
     37. Shen L

     (2019) Expansion of human-specific GGC repeat in neuronal intranuclear inclusion disease-related disorders

     American Journal of Human Genetics 105:166–176.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2019.05.013

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
274. 1. Todd PK
     2. Oh SY
     3. Krans A
     4. Pandey UB
     5. Di Prospero NA
     6. Min K-T
     7. Taylor JP
     8. Paulson HL

     (2010) Histone deacetylases suppress CGG repeat-induced neurodegeneration via transcriptional silencing in models of fragile X tremor ataxia syndrome

     PLOS Genetics 6:e1001240.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1001240

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
275. 1. Todd PK
     2. Oh SY
     3. Krans A
     4. He F
     5. Sellier C
     6. Frazer M
     7. Renoux AJ
     8. Chen K
     9. Scaglione KM
     10. Basrur V
     11. Elenitoba-Johnson K
     12. Vonsattel JP
     13. Louis ED
     14. Sutton MA
     15. Taylor JP
     16. Mills RE
     17. Charlet-Berguerand N
     18. Paulson HL

     (2013) Cgg repeat-associated translation mediates neurodegeneration in fragile X tremor ataxia syndrome

     Neuron 78:440–455.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2013.03.026

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
276. 1. Toulouse A
     2. Au-Yeung F
     3. Gaspar C
     4. Roussel J
     5. Dion P
     6. Rouleau GA

     (2005) Ribosomal frameshifting on MJD-1 transcripts with long CAG tracts

     Human Molecular Genetics 14:2649–2660.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddi299

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
277. 1. Trost B
     2. Engchuan W
     3. Nguyen CM
     4. Thiruvahindrapuram B
     5. Dolzhenko E
     6. Backstrom I
     7. Mirceta M
     8. Mojarad BA
     9. Yin Y
     10. Dov A
     11. Chandrakumar I
     12. Prasolava T
     13. Shum N
     14. Hamdan O
     15. Pellecchia G
     16. Howe JL
     17. Whitney J
     18. Klee EW
     19. Baheti S
     20. Amaral DG
     21. Anagnostou E
     22. Elsabbagh M
     23. Fernandez BA
     24. Hoang N
     25. Lewis MES
     26. Liu X
     27. Sjaarda C
     28. Smith IM
     29. Szatmari P
     30. Zwaigenbaum L
     31. Glazer D
     32. Hartley D
     33. Stewart AK
     34. Eberle MA
     35. Sato N
     36. Pearson CE
     37. Scherer SW
     38. Yuen RKC

     (2020) Genome-Wide detection of tandem DNA repeats that are expanded in autism

     Nature 586:80–86.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2579-z

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
278. 1. Tsuchiya M
     2. Nan H
     3. Koh K
     4. Ichinose Y
     5. Gao L
     6. Shimozono K
     7. Hata T
     8. Kim Y-J
     9. Ohtsuka T
     10. Cortese A
     11. Takiyama Y

     (2020) Rfc1 repeat expansion in Japanese patients with late-onset cerebellar ataxia

     Journal of Human Genetics 65:1143–1147.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s10038-020-0807-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
279. 1. Tu M
     2. Tong W
     3. Perkins R
     4. Valentine CR

     (2000) Predicted changes in pre-mRNA secondary structure vary in their association with exon skipping for mutations in exons 2, 4, and 8 of the HPRT gene and exon 51 of the fibrillin gene

     Mutation Research/Mutation Research Genomics 432:15–32.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1383-5726(99)00011-4

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
280. 1. Tuller T
     2. Veksler-Lublinsky I
     3. Gazit N
     4. Kupiec M
     5. Ruppin E
     6. Ziv-Ukelson M

     (2011) Composite effects of gene determinants on the translation speed and density of ribosomes

     Genome Biology 12:R110.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/gb-2011-12-11-r110

     • Google Scholar
281. 1. Udd B
     2. Krahe R

     (2012) The myotonic dystrophies: molecular, clinical, and therapeutic challenges

     The Lancet. Neurology 11:891–905.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(12)70204-1

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
282. 1. Uesaka M
     2. Nishimura O
     3. Go Y
     4. Nakashima K
     5. Agata K
     6. Imamura T

     (2014) Bidirectional promoters are the major source of gene activation-associated non-coding RNAs in mammals

     BMC Genomics 15:35.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-35

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
283. 1. Uffelmann E
     2. Huang QQ
     3. Munung NS
     4. de Vries J
     5. Okada Y
     6. Martin AR
     7. Martin HC
     8. Lappalainen T
     9. Posthuma D

     (2021) Genome-wide association studies

     Nature Reviews Methods Primers 1:1–21.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s43586-021-00056-9

     • Google Scholar
284. 1. Usdin K
     2. Woodford KJ

     (1995) Cgg repeats associated with DNA instability and chromosome fragility form structures that block DNA synthesis in vitro

     Nucleic Acids Research 23:4202–4209.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/23.20.4202

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
285. 1. Usdin K

     (2008) The biological effects of simple tandem repeats: lessons from the repeat expansion diseases

     Genome Research 18:1011–1019.

     https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.070409.107

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
286. 1. Usdin K
     2. Kumari D

     (2015) Repeat-Mediated epigenetic dysregulation of the FMR1 gene in the fragile X-related disorders

     Frontiers in Genetics 6:192.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2015.00192

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
287. 1. Verkerk AJ
     2. Pieretti M
     3. Sutcliffe JS
     4. Fu YH
     5. Kuhl DP
     6. Pizzuti A
     7. Reiner O
     8. Richards S
     9. Victoria MF
     10. Zhang FP

     (1991) Identification of a gene (FMR-1) containing a CGG repeat coincident with a breakpoint cluster region exhibiting length variation in fragile X syndrome

     Cell 65:905–914.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-8674(91)90397-h

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
288. 1. Verma AK
     2. Khan E
     3. Mishra SK
     4. Jain N
     5. Kumar A

     (2019) Piperine modulates protein mediated toxicity in fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome through interacting expanded CGG repeat (R (CGG) EXP) RNA

     ACS Chemical Neuroscience 10:3778–3788.

     https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.9b00282

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
289. 1. Verma AK
     2. Khan E
     3. Mishra SK
     4. Mishra A
     5. Charlet-Berguerand N
     6. Kumar A

     (2020) Curcumin regulates the R (CGG) EXP RNA hairpin structure and ameliorate defects in fragile X-associated tremor ataxia syndrome

     Frontiers in Neuroscience 14:295.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2020.00295

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
290. 1. Verma AK
     2. Khan E
     3. Mishra SK
     4. Kumar A

     (2022) Small molecule screening discovers compounds that reduce fmrpolyg protein aggregates and splicing defect toxicity in fragile X-associated tremor/ataxia syndrome

     Molecular Neurobiology 59:1992–2007.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s12035-021-02697-z

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
291. 1. Verstrepen KJ
     2. Jansen A
     3. Lewitter F
     4. Fink GR

     (2005) Intragenic tandem repeats generate functional variability

     Nature Genetics 37:986–990.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1618

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
292. 1. Vinces MD
     2. Legendre M
     3. Caldara M
     4. Hagihara M
     5. Verstrepen KJ

     (2009) Unstable tandem repeats in promoters confer transcriptional evolvability

     Science 324:1213–1216.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1170097

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
293. 1. Volle CB
     2. Delaney S

     (2012) Cag/Ctg repeats alter the affinity for the histone core and the positioning of DNA in the nucleosome

     Biochemistry 51:9814–9825.

     https://doi.org/10.1021/bi301416v

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
294. 1. Voynov V
     2. Verstrepen KJ
     3. Jansen A
     4. Runner VM
     5. Buratowski S
     6. Fink GR

     (2006) Genes with internal repeats require the THO complex for transcription

     PNAS 103:14423–14428.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0606546103

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
295. 1. Wang YH
     2. Gellibolian R
     3. Shimizu M
     4. Wells RD
     5. Griffith J

     (1996) Long CCG triplet repeat blocks exclude nucleosomes: a possible mechanism for the nature of fragile sites in chromosomes

     Journal of Molecular Biology 263:511–516.

     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1996.0593

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
296. 1. Wang YH

     (2007) Chromatin structure of repeating CTG/CAG and CGG/CCG sequences in human disease

     Frontiers in Bioscience 12:4731–4741.

     https://doi.org/10.2741/2422

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
297. 1. Wang ET
     2. Cody NAL
     3. Jog S
     4. Biancolella M
     5. Wang TT
     6. Treacy DJ
     7. Luo S
     8. Schroth GP
     9. Housman DE
     10. Reddy S
     11. Lécuyer E
     12. Burge CB

     (2012) Transcriptome-Wide regulation of pre-mRNA splicing and mRNA localization by muscleblind proteins

     Cell 150:710–724.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2012.06.041

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
298. 1. Weinberg DE
     2. Shah P
     3. Eichhorn SW
     4. Hussmann JA
     5. Plotkin JB
     6. Bartel DP

     (2016) Improved ribosome-footprint and mrna measurements provide insights into dynamics and regulation of yeast translation

     Cell Reports 14:1787–1799.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.01.043

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
299. 1. Willems T
     2. Gymrek M
     3. Highnam G
     4. Mittelman D
     5. Erlich Y
     6. 1000 Genomes Project Consortium

     (2014) The landscape of human STR variation

     Genome Research 24:1894–1904.

     https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.177774.114

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
300. 1. Willems T
     2. Gymrek M
     3. Poznik GD
     4. Tyler-Smith C
     5. 1000 Genomes Project Chromosome Y Group
     6. Erlich Y

     (2016) Population-Scale sequencing data enable precise estimates of Y-STR mutation rates

     American Journal of Human Genetics 98:919–933.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.04.001

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
301. 1. Willemsen R
     2. Bontekoe CJM
     3. Severijnen LA
     4. Oostra BA

     (2002) Timing of the absence of FMR1 expression in full mutation chorionic villi

     Human Genetics 110:601–605.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-002-0723-5

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
302. 1. Winchester CL
     2. Ferrier RK
     3. Sermoni A
     4. Clark BJ
     5. Johnson KJ

     (1999) Characterization of the expression of DMPK and SIX5 in the human eye and implications for pathogenesis in myotonic dystrophy

     Human Molecular Genetics 8:481–492.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/8.3.481

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
303. 1. Wojciechowska M
     2. Olejniczak M
     3. Galka-Marciniak P
     4. Jazurek M
     5. Krzyzosiak WJ

     (2014) Ran translation and frameshifting as translational challenges at simple repeats of human neurodegenerative disorders

     Nucleic Acids Research 42:11849–11864.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gku794

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
304. 1. Wright SE
     2. Rodriguez CM
     3. Monroe J
     4. Xing J
     5. Krans A
     6. Flores BN
     7. Barsur V
     8. Ivanova MI
     9. Koutmou KS
     10. Barmada SJ
     11. Todd PK

     (2022) Cgg repeats trigger translational frameshifts that generate aggregation-prone chimeric proteins

     Nucleic Acids Research 50:8674–8689.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkac626

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
305. 1. Wyner N
     2. Barash M
     3. McNevin D

     (2020) Forensic autosomal short tandem repeats and their potential association with phenotype

     Frontiers in Genetics 11:884.

     https://doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2020.00884

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
306. 1. Xi Z
     2. Zinman L
     3. Moreno D
     4. Schymick J
     5. Liang Y
     6. Sato C
     7. Zheng Y
     8. Ghani M
     9. Dib S
     10. Keith J
     11. Robertson J
     12. Rogaeva E

     (2013) Hypermethylation of the CpG island near the G4C2 repeat in ALS with a C9orf72 expansion

     American Journal of Human Genetics 92:981–989.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2013.04.017

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
307. 1. Yamamoto A
     2. Lucas JJ
     3. Hen R

     (2000) Reversal of neuropathology and motor dysfunction in a conditional model of Huntington’s disease

     Cell 101:57–66.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80623-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
308. 1. Yap K
     2. Mukhina S
     3. Zhang G
     4. Tan JSC
     5. Ong HS
     6. Makeyev EV

     (2018) A short tandem repeat-enriched RNA assembles a nuclear compartment to control alternative splicing and promote cell survival

     Molecular Cell 72:525–540.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2018.08.041

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
309. 1. Yin Q
     2. Wang H
     3. Li N
     4. Ding Y
     5. Xie Z
     6. Jin L
     7. Li Y
     8. Wang Q
     9. Liu X
     10. Xu L
     11. Li Q
     12. Ma Y
     13. Cheng Y
     14. Wang K
     15. Zhong C
     16. Yu Q
     17. Tang W
     18. Chen W
     19. Yang W
     20. Zhang F
     21. Ding C
     22. Bao L
     23. Zhou B
     24. Hu P
     25. Li J

     (2020) Dosage effect of multiple genes accounts for multisystem disorder of myotonic dystrophy type 1

     Cell Research 30:133–145.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41422-019-0264-2

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
310. 1. Yu S
     2. Pritchard M
     3. Kremer E
     4. Lynch M
     5. Nancarrow J
     6. Baker E
     7. Holman K
     8. Mulley JC
     9. Warren ST
     10. Schlessinger D

     (1991) Fragile X genotype characterized by an unstable region of DNA

     Science 252:1179–1181.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.252.5009.1179

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
311. 1. Zhang K
     2. Donnelly CJ
     3. Haeusler AR
     4. Grima JC
     5. Machamer JB
     6. Steinwald P
     7. Daley EL
     8. Miller SJ
     9. Cunningham KM
     10. Vidensky S
     11. Gupta S
     12. Thomas MA
     13. Hong I
     14. Chiu S-L
     15. Huganir RL
     16. Ostrow LW
     17. Matunis MJ
     18. Wang J
     19. Sattler R
     20. Lloyd TE
     21. Rothstein JD

     (2015) The C9orf72 repeat expansion disrupts nucleocytoplasmic transport

     Nature 525:56–61.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14973

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
312. 1. Zhang Y-J
     2. Gendron TF
     3. Grima JC
     4. Sasaguri H
     5. Jansen-West K
     6. Xu Y-F
     7. Katzman RB
     8. Gass J
     9. Murray ME
     10. Shinohara M
     11. Lin W-L
     12. Garrett A
     13. Stankowski JN
     14. Daughrity L
     15. Tong J
     16. Perkerson EA
     17. Yue M
     18. Chew J
     19. Castanedes-Casey M
     20. Kurti A
     21. Wang ZS
     22. Liesinger AM
     23. Baker JD
     24. Jiang J
     25. Lagier-Tourenne C
     26. Edbauer D
     27. Cleveland DW
     28. Rademakers R
     29. Boylan KB
     30. Bu G
     31. Link CD
     32. Dickey CA
     33. Rothstein JD
     34. Dickson DW
     35. Fryer JD
     36. Petrucelli L

     (2016) C9Orf72 poly (GA) aggregates sequester and impair HR23 and nucleocytoplasmic transport proteins

     Nature Neuroscience 19:668–677.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.4272

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
313. 1. Zu T
     2. Gibbens B
     3. Doty NS
     4. Gomes-Pereira M
     5. Huguet A
     6. Stone MD
     7. Margolis J
     8. Peterson M
     9. Markowski TW
     10. Ingram MAC
     11. Nan Z
     12. Forster C
     13. Low WC
     14. Schoser B
     15. Somia NV
     16. Clark HB
     17. Schmechel S
     18. Bitterman PB
     19. Gourdon G
     20. Swanson MS
     21. Moseley M
     22. Ranum LPW

     (2011) Non-ATG–initiated translation directed by microsatellite expansions

     PNAS 108:260–265.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1013343108

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
314. 1. Zu T
     2. Liu Y
     3. Bañez-Coronel M
     4. Reid T
     5. Pletnikova O
     6. Lewis J
     7. Miller TM
     8. Harms MB
     9. Falchook AE
     10. Subramony SH
     11. Ostrow LW
     12. Rothstein JD
     13. Troncoso JC
     14. Ranum LPW

     (2013) Ran proteins and RNA foci from antisense transcripts in c9orf72 ALS and frontotemporal dementia

     PNAS 110:E4968–E4977.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1315438110

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
315. 1. Zu T
     2. Cleary JD
     3. Liu Y
     4. Bañez-Coronel M
     5. Bubenik JL
     6. Ayhan F
     7. Ashizawa T
     8. Xia G
     9. Clark HB
     10. Yachnis AT
     11. Swanson MS
     12. Ranum LPW

     (2017) Ran translation regulated by muscleblind proteins in myotonic dystrophy type 2

     Neuron 95:1292–1305.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuron.2017.08.039

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar