ArticleBMC evolutionary biology2006
The reach of the genome signature in prokaryotes.
Article in BMC evolutionary biology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 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
34 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genomic Signature in Evolutionary Biology: A Review.Biology · 2023Review
- Coexistence of Antibiotic Resistance Genes and Virulence Factors Deciphered by Large-Scale Complete Genome Analysis.mSystems · 2020Article
- Comparative Genomic Analysis Confirms Five Genetic Populations of the Select Agent,Microorganisms · 2020Article
- Genomic Signatures Among Acanthamoeba polyphaga Entoorganisms Unveil Evidence of Coevolution.Journal of molecular evolution · 2019Article
- Novel Self-Transmissible and Broad-Host-Range Plasmids Exogenously Captured From Anaerobic Granules or Cow Manure.Frontiers in microbiology · 2018Article
- Comparative genomics of Pseudomonas fluorescens subclade III strains from human lungs.BMC genomics · 2015Article
- Draft Genome Sequences of Five Pseudomonas fluorescens Subclade I and II Strains, Isolated from Human Respiratory Samples.Genome announcements · 2015Article
- Phylogenomic Analysis of Oenococcus oeni Reveals Specific Domestication of Strains to Cider and Wines.Genome biology and evolution · 2015Article
- Homology-independent metrics for comparative genomics.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2015Review
- Microbiology, genomics, and clinical significance of the Pseudomonas fluorescens species complex, an unappreciated colonizer of humans.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2014Review
- Microbial genomic taxonomy.BMC genomics · 2013Article
- Alignment-free genome tree inference by learning group-specific distance metrics.Genome biology and evolution · 2013Article
- Microbial lifestyle and genome signatures.Current genomics · 2012Article
- Biodefense Oriented Genomic-Based Pathogen Classification Systems: Challenges and Opportunities.Journal of bioterrorism & biodefense · 2012Article
- Genome Signature Difference between Deinococcus radiodurans and Thermus thermophilus.International journal of evolutionary biology · 2012Article
- A quantitative account of genomic island acquisitions in prokaryotes.BMC genomics · 2011Article
- N-gram analysis of 970 microbial organisms reveals presence of biological language models.BMC bioinformatics · 2011Article
- Article
- Article
- Mobility of plasmids.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2010Review
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
backgroundWith the increased availability of sequenced genomes there have been several initiatives to infer evolutionary relationships by whole genome characteristics. One of these studies suggested good congruence between genome synteny, shared gene content, 16S ribosomal DNA identity, codon usage and the genome signature in prokaryotes. Here we rigorously test the phylogenetic signal of the genome signature, which consists of the genome-specific relative frequencies of dinucleotides, on 334 sequenced prokaryotic genome sequences.
resultsIntrageneric comparisons show that in general the genomic dissimilarity scores are higher than in intraspecific comparisons, in accordance with the suggested phylogenetic signal of the genome signature. Exceptions to this trend, (Bartonella spp., Bordetella spp., Salmonella spp. and Yersinia spp.), which have low average intrageneric genomic dissimilarity scores, suggest that members of these genera might be considered the same species. On the other hand, high genomic dissimilarity values for intraspecific analyses suggest that in some cases (e.g. Prochlorococcus marinus, Pseudomonas fluorescens, Buchnera aphidicola and Rhodopseudomonas palustris) different strains from the same species may actually represent different species. Comparing 16S rDNA identity with genomic dissimilarity values corroborates the previously suggested trend in phylogenetic signal, albeit that the dissimilarity values only provide low resolution.
conclusionThe genome signature has a distinct phylogenetic signal, independent of individual genetic marker genes. A reliable phylogenetic clustering cannot be based on dissimilarity values alone, as bootstrapping is not possible for this parameter. It can however be used to support or refute a given phylogeny and resulting taxonomy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.