Here are some references from an old BL thread discussing the ENCODE project:
Papers:
- The Case for Junk DNA - May 2014 (an easy read)
- 8.2% of the Human Genome Is Constrained: Variation in Rates of Turnover across Functional Element Classes in the Human Lineage - July 2014
- A method for calculating probabilities of fitness consequences for point mutations across the human genome
- The C-value paradox, junk DNA and ENCODE
- Is junk DNA bunk? A critique of ENCODE
- On the Immortality of Television Sets: “Function” in the Human Genome According to the Evolution-Free Gospel of ENCODE
- Can ENCODE tell us how much junk DNA we carry in our genome?
- The ENCODE project: Missteps overshadowing a success
- Is Most of Our DNA Garbage?
- Some blog posts
Obviously such will not have An Upper Limit on the Functional Fraction of the Human Genome from 2017 or On causal roles and selected effects: our genome is mostly junk also from 2017 that is a review type of paper on the topic.
I’m not sure how exactly your yeast paper has anything to do with all the papers written on human beings where much less than 20% has any function in the sense of fitness.
But they have not been heading this way… for a whole decade. The only paper at all was the ENCODE project which is discussed in length above… certainly they had a very “liberal” definition of function that many non-experts jumped on.
Also function has nothing to do with the ERV evidence.