ArticleGenome biology2006
The tree of one percent.
Article in Genome biology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 132 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
132 citing papers in PubMed.
- Fast and accurate taxonomic domain assignment of short metagenomic reads using BBERT.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- The emergence of metabolisms through Earth history and implications for biospheric evolution.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Challenges in Assembling the Dated Tree of Life.Genome biology and evolution · 2024Article
- The nature of the last universal common ancestor and its impact on the early Earth system.Nature ecology & evolution · 2024Article
- A distance-based model for convergent evolution.Journal of mathematical biology · 2024Article
- A universal and constant rate of gene content change traces pangenome flux to LUCA.FEMS microbiology letters · 2024Article
- Phylogenomic Testing of Root Hypotheses.Genome biology and evolution · 2023Article
- Carl Woese: Still ahead of our time.mLife · 2022Article
- Article
- Classes of explicit phylogenetic networks and their biological and mathematical significance.Journal of mathematical biology · 2022Review
- An estimate of the deepest branches of the tree of life from ancient vertically evolving genes.eLife · 2022Article
- SpeciesRax: A Tool for Maximum Likelihood Species Tree Inference from Gene Family Trees under Duplication, Transfer, and Loss.Molecular biology and evolution · 2022Article
- Eukaryogenesis: The Rise of an Emergent Superorganism.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Revisiting Antibiotic Resistance: Mechanistic Foundations to Evolutionary Outlook.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- An Efficient, Nonphylogenetic Method for Detecting Genes Sharing Evolutionary Signals in Phylogenomic Data Sets.Genome biology and evolution · 2021Article
- Rhizomal Reclassification of Living Organisms.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- The Order of Trait Emergence in the Evolution of Cyanobacterial Multicellularity.Genome biology and evolution · 2021Article
- Investigating the Concept and Origin of Viruses.Trends in microbiology · 2020Review
- A spectrum of verticality across genes.PLoS genetics · 2020Article
- Should Networks Supplant Tree Building?Microorganisms · 2020Review
72 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Two significant evolutionary processes are fundamentally not tree-like in nature--lateral gene transfer among prokaryotes and endosymbiotic gene transfer (from organelles) among eukaryotes. To incorporate such processes into the bigger picture of early evolution, biologists need to depart from the preconceived notion that all genomes are related by a single bifurcating tree.
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.