Evidence map›Paper›PMID 10535975›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America1999

Calibrating bacterial evolution.

H Ochman, S Elwyn, N A Moran

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1999. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 216 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
216citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

216 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Rapid host switching ofbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Modeling the mosaic structure of bacterial genomes to infer their evolutionary history.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

156 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

H OchmanDepartment of Ecology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721, USA. hochman@u.arizona.edu
S Elwyn
N A Moran

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Attempts to calibrate bacterial evolution have relied on the assumption that rates of molecular sequence divergence in bacteria are similar to those of higher eukaryotes, or to those of the few bacterial taxa for which ancestors can be reliably dated from ecological or geological evidence. Despite similarities in the substitution rates estimated for some lineages, comparisons of the relative rates of evolution at different classes of nucleotide sites indicate no basis for their universal application to all bacteria. However, there is evidence that bacteria have a constant genome-wide mutation rate on an evolutionary time scale but that this rate differs dramatically from the rate estimated by experimental methods.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionBacteriaMutation

Identifiers

PMID10535975
PMCPMC23026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.