Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11337470›Full record

ArticleGenome research2001

From first base: the sequence of the tip of the X chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster, a comparison of two sequencing strategies.

P V Benos, M K Gatt, L Murphy, D Harris, B Barrell, C Ferraz, S Vidal, C Brun, J Demaille, E Cadieu and 37 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Short and long-term evolutionary dynamics of subtelomeric piRNA clusters in Drosophila.DNA research : an international journal for rapid publication of reports on genes and genomes · 2017
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. AVID: A global alignment program.Genome research · 2003
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
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

47 authors at 2 institutions in 6 countries.

P V BenosEMBL Outstation, The European Bioinformatics Institute, Wellcome Trust Genome Campus, Hinxton, Cambridge, CB10 1SD, UK.
M K Gatt
L Murphy
D Harris
B Barrell
C Ferraz
S Vidal
C Brun
J Demaille
E Cadieu
S Dreano
S Gloux
V Lelaure
S Mottier
F Galibert
D Borkova
B Miñana
F C Kafatos
S Bolshakov
I Sidén-Kiamos
G Papagiannakis
L Spanos
C Louis
E Madueño
B de Pablos
J Modolell
A Peter
P Schöttler
M Werner
F Mourkioti
N Beinert
G Dowe
U Schäfer
H Jäckle
A Bucheton
D Callister
L Campbell
N S Henderson
P J McMillan
C Salles
E Tait
P Valenti
R D Saunders
A Billaud
L Pachter
D M Glover
M Ashburner
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FREuropean Bioinformatics Institute · GB

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We present the sequence of a contiguous 2.63 Mb of DNA extending from the tip of the X chromosome of Drosophila melanogaster. Within this sequence, we predict 277 protein coding genes, of which 94 had been sequenced already in the course of studying the biology of their gene products, and examples of 12 different transposable elements. We show that an interval between bands 3A2 and 3C2, believed in the 1970s to show a correlation between the number of bands on the polytene chromosomes and the 20 genes identified by conventional genetics, is predicted to contain 45 genes from its DNA sequence. We have determined the insertion sites of P-elements from 111 mutant lines, about half of which are in a position likely to affect the expression of novel predicted genes, thus representing a resource for subsequent functional genomic analysis. We compare the European Drosophila Genome Project sequence with the corresponding part of the independently assembled and annotated Joint Sequence determined through "shotgun" sequencing. Discounting differences in the distribution of known transposable elements between the strains sequenced in the two projects, we detected three major sequence differences, two of which are probably explained by errors in assembly; the origin of the third major difference is unclear. In addition there are eight sequence gaps within the Joint Sequence. At least six of these eight gaps are likely to be sites of transposable elements; the other two are complex. Of the 275 genes in common to both projects, 60% are identical within 1% of their predicted amino-acid sequence and 31% show minor differences such as in choice of translation initiation or termination codons; the remaining 9% show major differences in interpretation.

Indexed as

Drosophila ProteinsAnimalsBasic Helix-Loop-Helix ProteinsComputational BiologyDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Transposable ElementsDrosophila melanogasterFemaleGene OrderGenes, InsectMaleMolecular Sequence DataPhysical Chromosome MappingSequence Analysis, DNATranscription FactorsX Chromosomeac protein, DrosophilaBasic Helix-Loop-Helix ProteinsDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Transposable ElementsDrosophila Proteinssc protein, DrosophilaTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID11337470
PMCPMC311117
OpenAlexW2124276873

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.