Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16275782›Full record

ReviewNucleic acids research2005

Farm animal genomics and informatics: an update.

Ahmed Fadiel, Ifeanyi Anidi, Kenneth D Eichenbaum

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nucleic acids research, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Current Perspectives of the Chicken Gastrointestinal Tract and Its Microbiome.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2018
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Optimal Design for Marker-assisted Gene Pyramiding in Cross Population.Asian-Australasian journal of animal sciences · 2012
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. PigGIS: Pig Genomic Informatics System.Nucleic acids research · 2007
    Article
  11. 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

3 authors.

Ahmed FadielYale University School of Medicine, Yale Center for Research On Reproductive Biology, New Haven, CT 06511, USA. afadiel@yale.edu
Ifeanyi Anidi
Kenneth D Eichenbaum

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Farm animal genomics is of interest to a wide audience of researchers because of the utility derived from understanding how genomics and proteomics function in various organisms. Applications such as xenotransplantation, increased livestock productivity, bioengineering new materials, products and even fabrics are several reasons for thriving farm animal genome activity. Currently mined in rapidly growing data warehouses, completed genomes of chicken, fish and cows are available but are largely stored in decentralized data repositories. In this paper, we provide an informatics primer on farm animal bioinformatics and genome project resources which drive attention to the most recent advances in the field. We hope to provide individuals in biotechnology and in the farming industry with information on resources and updates concerning farm animal genome projects.

Indexed as

AnimalsAnimals, DomesticCattleChickensComputational BiologyDatabases, GeneticExpressed Sequence TagsFishesGenetic LinkageGenomicsPhysical Chromosome MappingQuantitative Trait LociRabbitsSheepSwine

Identifiers

PMID16275782
PMCPMC1278942

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.