Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16670683›Full record

ReviewEMBO reports2006

Yeast Gal4: a transcriptional paradigm revisited.

Ana Traven, Branka Jelicic, Mary Sopta

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EMBO reports, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
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

105 citing papers in PubMed, 200 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Soil microbiome bacteria protect plants against filamentous fungal infections via intercellular contacts.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Yeast Tools for Studying Type II Topoisomerases in Budding Yeast.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Engineering a universal and efficient platform for terpenoid synthesis in yeast.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

45 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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ana TravenSt Vincent's Institute, 9 Princes Street, Fitzroy, Vic 3065, Australia.
Branka Jelicic
Mary Sopta
Rudjer Boskovic Institute · HRSt Vincents Institute of Medical Research · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

During the past two decades, the yeast Gal4 protein has been used as a model for studying transcriptional activation in eukaryotes. Many of the properties of transcriptional regulation first demonstrated for Gal4 have since been shown to be reiterated in the function of several other eukaryotic transcriptional regulators. Technological advances based on the transcriptional properties of this factor--such as the two-hybrid technology and Gal4-inducible systems for controlled gene expression--have had far-reaching influences in fields beyond transcription. In this review, we provide an updated account of Gal4 function, including data from new technologies that have been recently applied to the study of the GAL network.

Indexed as

Models, MolecularDNA-Binding ProteinsGene Expression Regulation, FungalSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsTranscriptional ActivationTranscription FactorsTranscription, GeneticDNA-Binding ProteinsGAL4 protein, S cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsTranscription Factors

Identifiers

PMID16670683
PMCPMC1479557
OpenAlexW2107553595

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.