Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16498704›Full record

ReviewYeast (Chichester, England)2006

Basic methods for fission yeast.

Susan L Forsburg, Nicholas Rhind

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Yeast (Chichester, England), 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 345 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
345citing 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

345 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Using CMAC Staining for Vacuole Characterization in Yeast.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Identification and characterization ofmicroPublication biology · 2026
    Article
  17. Evolutionary persistence and divergence of thebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. TheCells · 2025
    Article

285 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

2 authors.

Susan L ForsburgProgram in Molecular and Computational Biology, University of Southern California, 1050 Child's Way MCB201, Los Angeles, CA 90089-2910, USA. forsburg@usc.edu
Nicholas Rhind

Funding

Genetic Analysis of MSM Protein Function in S. PombeR01GM059321 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI FORSBURG, SUSAN L · 1999 to 2012
$4.7M
The Role of MRN in the S-Phase DNA Damage CheckpointR01GM069957 · NIGMS · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI RHIND, NICHOLAS R · 2004 to 2013
$2.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS GM-059321NIGMS NIH HHS GM-069957NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM059321NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM069957
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe is a popular model system, and has been particularly influential in studies of the cell cycle and chromosome dynamics. Despite its differences from Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the tools and methods for fission yeast are conceptually similar to those used in budding yeast. Here, we present basic methods sufficient for a beginner in this system to carry out most required manipulations for genetic analysis or molecular biology.

Indexed as

Crosses, GeneticMolecular BiologyMycologySchizosaccharomycesSchizosaccharomyces pombe ProteinsTransformation, GeneticSchizosaccharomyces pombe Proteins

Identifiers

PMID16498704
PMCPMC5074380

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.