ArticleBioinformation2007
Comparative genomics - a perspective.
Article in Bioinformation, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multiscale comparative pathogenomic analysis of Vibrio anguillarum linking serotype diversity, genomic plasticity and pathogenicity.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2025Article
- Genomics Research on the Road of Studying Biology and Virulence of Cereal Rust Fungi.Molecular plant pathology · 2025Review
- Structural Analysis of Virus Regulatory N6-Methyladenosine (m6A) Machinery of the Black Flying Fox (Genes · 2024Article
- Regulatory Element Analysis and Comparative Genomics Study of Heavy Metal-Resistant Genes in the Complete GenomeBioinformatics and biology insights · 2024Article
- Comparative plastome analyses and evolutionary relationships of 25 East Asian species within the medicinal plant genusFrontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- Phenotypic and Genotypic Characterization ofMicroorganisms · 2023Article
- The NIH Comparative Genomics Resource: addressing the promises and challenges of comparative genomics on human health.BMC genomics · 2023Review
- Genome-Wide Identification, Evolutionary and Mutational Analysis of the Buffalo Sox Gene Family.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Article
- The Sordariomycetes: an expanding resource with Big Data for mining in evolutionary genomics and transcriptomics.Frontiers in fungal biology · 2023Review
- Pangenomes-identified singletons for designing specific primers to identify bacterial strains in a plant growth-promoting consortium.Molecular biology reports · 2022Article
- Insights into genome evolution, pan-genome, and phylogenetic implication through mitochondrial genome sequence of Naegleria fowleri species.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- First Steps in the Analysis of Prokaryotic Pan-Genomes.Bioinformatics and biology insights · 2020Review
- PanWeb: A web interface for pan-genomic analysis.PloS one · 2017Article
- Inside the Pan-genome - Methods and Software Overview.Current genomics · 2015Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapidly emerging field of comparative genomics has yielded dramatic results. Comparative genome analysis has become feasible with the availability of a number of completely sequenced genomes. Comparison of complete genomes between organisms allow for global views on genome evolution and the availability of many completely sequenced genomes increases the predictive power in deciphering the hidden information in genome design, function and evolution. Thus, comparison of human genes with genes from other genomes in a genomic landscape could help assign novel functions for un-annotated genes. Here, we discuss the recently used techniques for comparative genomics and their derived inferences in genome biology.
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.