ArticlePLoS genetics2006
Evaluating support for the current classification of eukaryotic diversity.
Article in PLoS genetics, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 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
60 citing papers in PubMed.
- Wheat Allergy in the Era of Precision Medicine: From Novel Molecular Markers to New Therapeutic Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Article
- Investigation of the effects of Bipolar Radiofrequency Energy on the Structural Morphology of Dental Plaque.European journal of dentistry · 2024Article
- Weak population spatial genetic structure and low infraspecific specificity for fungal partners in the rare mycoheterotrophic orchid Epipogium aphyllum.Journal of plant research · 2022Article
- Palm oil and its wastes as bioenergy sources: a comprehensive review.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019Review
- A putativeJournal of biosciences · 2018Article
- Metagenomics reshapes the concepts of RNA virus evolution by revealing extensive horizontal virus transfer.Virus research · 2018Review
- 16S rRNA gene metabarcoding and TEM reveals different ecological strategies within the genus Neogloboquadrina (planktonic foraminifer).PloS one · 2018Article
- Evolutionary hallmarks of the human proteome: chasing the age and coregulation of protein-coding genes.BMC genomics · 2016Article
- Phylogenetic Resolution of Deep Eukaryotic and Fungal Relationships Using Highly Conserved Low-Copy Nuclear Genes.Genome biology and evolution · 2016Article
- Cytoskeletal architecture and its evolutionary significance in amoeboid eukaryotes and their mode of locomotion.Royal Society open science · 2016Article
- Whole Genome Sequencing Identifies a Novel Factor Required for Secretory Granule Maturation in Tetrahymena thermophila.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2016Article
- The All-Data-Based Evolutionary Hypothesis of Ciliated Protists with a Revised Classification of the Phylum Ciliophora (Eukaryota, Alveolata).Scientific reports · 2016Article
- Article
- Population Genomics and the Statistical Values of Race: An Interdisciplinary Perspective on the Biological Classification of Human Populations and Implications for Clinical Genetic Epidemiological Research.Frontiers in genetics · 2016Review
- Whole-Genome Resequencing Reveals Extensive Natural Variation in the Model Green Alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii.The Plant cell · 2015Article
- Secretion of Polypeptide Crystals from Tetrahymena thermophila Secretory Organelles (Mucocysts) Depends on Processing by a Cysteine Cathepsin, Cth4p.Eukaryotic cell · 2015Article
- Structural organization of very small chromosomes: study on a single-celled evolutionary distant eukaryote Giardia intestinalis.Chromosoma · 2015Article
- A higher level classification of all living organisms.PloS one · 2015Article
- Tetrahymena thermophila: a divergent perspective on membrane traffic.Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Perspectives on the classification of eukaryotic diversity have changed rapidly in recent years, as the four eukaryotic groups within the five-kingdom classification--plants, animals, fungi, and protists--have been transformed through numerous permutations into the current system of six "supergroups." The intent of the supergroup classification system is to unite microbial and macroscopic eukaryotes based on phylogenetic inference. This supergroup approach is increasing in popularity in the literature and is appearing in introductory biology textbooks. We evaluate the stability and support for the current six-supergroup classification of eukaryotes based on molecular genealogies. We assess three aspects of each supergroup: (1) the stability of its taxonomy, (2) the support for monophyly (single evolutionary origin) in molecular analyses targeting a supergroup, and (3) the support for monophyly when a supergroup is included as an out-group in phylogenetic studies targeting other taxa. Our analysis demonstrates that supergroup taxonomies are unstable and that support for groups varies tremendously, indicating that the current classification scheme of eukaryotes is likely premature. We highlight several trends contributing to the instability and discuss the requirements for establishing robust clades within the eukaryotic tree of life.
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.