ArticleParasitology research2007
Comparison of 18S ribosomal RNA gene sequences of Eurytrema coelmaticum and Eurytrema pancreaticum.
Article in Parasitology research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Morphological and molecular characterization of Eurytrema spp. Looss, 1907 detected in domestic water buffaloes and cattle in northern Vietnam.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2023Article
- Article
- Morphological and molecular characterization of Eurytrema cladorchis parasitizing cattle (Bos indicus) in Bangladesh.Parasitology research · 2015Article
- Identification and characterization of microRNAs in the pancreatic fluke Eurytrema pancreaticum.Parasites & vectors · 2013Article
- Phylogenetic relationships of the genus Eurytrema from domestic and wild animal based on 18S rRNA sequences.Parasitology research · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The partial 18S rRNA sequences of E. coelmaticum and E. pancreaticum were amplified using conserved primers and an evolutionary tree was constructed using Neighbor-Joining. The percent identity of Eurytrema species with other Dicrocoeliidae varied from 97.5 to 98.2, while the percent identity between the two Eurytrema species was up to 99.3. The tree showed that E. coelmaticum and E. pancreaticum were not situated in the same position, and they formed one cluster with L. collurioni. These results support a confirmation with molecular data that E. coelomaticum and E. pancreaticum are different species which apparently were not seriously questioned in the past.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17004097What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.