The RNA coded by the short-interspersed nuclear element does not code for any protein product but is nonetheless reverse-transcribed and inserted back into an alternate region in the genome. For this reason, short interspersed nuclear elements are believed to have co-evolved with long interspersed nuclear element (LINEs), as LINEs do in fact encode protein products which enable them to be reverse- transcribed and integrated back into the genome.  SINEs are  believed to have co-opted the proteins coded by LINEs which are contained in 2 reading frames. Open reading frame 1 (ORF 1)  encodes a protein which binds to RNA and acts as a chaperone to facilitate and maintain the LINE protein-RNA complex structure. Open reading frame 2 (ORF 2) codes a protein which possesses both endonuclease and reverse transcriptase activities. This enables the LINE mRNA to be reverse-transcribed into DNA and integrated into the genome based on the sequence-motifs recognized by the protein's endonuclease domain.
LINE-1 (L1) is transcribed and retrotransposed most frequently in the germ-line and during early development; as a result SINEs move around the genome most during these periods. SINE transcription is down-regulated by transcription factors in somatic cells after early development, though stress can cause up-regulation of normally silent SINEs. SINEs can be transferred between individuals or species via horizontal transfer through a viral vector.
SINEs are known to share sequence homology with LINES which gives a basis by which the LINE machinery can reverse transcribe and integrate SINE transcripts. Alternately, some SINEs are believed to use a much more complex system of integrating back into the genome; this system involves the use random double-stranded DNA breaks (rather than the endonuclease coded by related long-interspersed nuclear elements creating an insertion-site). These DNA breaks are utilized to prime reverse transcriptase, ultimately integrating the SINE transcript back into the genome. SINEs nonetheless depend on enzymes coded by other DNA elements and are thus known as non-autonomous retrotransposons as they depend on the machinery of LINEs, which are known as autonomous retrotransposons.<
The theory that short-interspersed nuclear elements have evolved to utilize the retrotransposon machinery of long-interspersed nuclear elements is supported by studies which examine the presence and distribution of LINEs and SINEs in taxa of different species. For example, LINEs and SINEs in rodents and primates show very strong homology at the insertion-site motif. Such evidence is a basis for the proposed mechanism in which integration of the SINE transcript can be co-opted with LINE-coded protein products. This is specifically demonstrated by a detailed analysis of over 20 rodent species profiled LINEs and SINEs, mainly L1s and B1s respectively; these are families of LINEs and SINEs found at high frequencies in rodents along with other mammals. The study sought to provide phylogenetic clarity within the context of LINE and SINE activity.
The study arrived at a candidate taxa believed to be the first instance of L1 LINE extinction; it expectedly discovered that there was no evidence to suggest that B1 SINE activity occurred in species which did not have L1 LINE activity. Also, the study suggested that B1 short-interspersed nuclear element silencing in fact occurred before L1 long-interspersed nuclear element extinction; this is due to the fact that B1 SINEs are silenced in the genus most-closely related to the genus which does not contain active L1 LINEs (though the genus with B1 SINE silencing still contains active L1 LINEs).  Another genus was also found which similarly contained active L1 long-interspersed nuclear elements but did not contain B1 short-interspersed nuclear elements; the opposite scenario, in which active B1 SINEs were present in a genus which did not possess active L1 LINEs was not found. This result was expected and strongly supports the theory that SINEs have evolved to co-opt the RNA-binding proteins, endonucleases, and reverse-transcriptases coded by LINEs. In taxa which do not actively transcribe and translate long-interspersed nuclear elements protein-products, SINEs do not have the theoretical foundation by which to retrotranspose within the genome. The results obtained in Rinehart et al. are thus very supportive of the current model of SINE retrotransposition.