Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18073440›Full record

ArticleGenetics2007

A microsatellite genetic map of the turbot (Scophthalmus maximus).

Carmen Bouza, Miguel Hermida, Belén G Pardo, Carlos Fernández, Gloria G Fortes, Jaime Castro, Laura Sánchez, Pablo Presa, Montse Pérez, Andrés Sanjuán and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Carmen BouzaDepartment of Genetics, University of Santiago de Compostela, Lugo, Spain.
Miguel Hermida
Belén G Pardo
Carlos Fernández
Gloria G Fortes
Jaime Castro
Laura Sánchez
Pablo Presa
Montse Pérez
Andrés Sanjuán
Alejandro de Carlos
José Antonio Alvarez-Dios
Susana Ezcurra
Rosa M Cal
Francesc Piferrer
Paulino Martínez

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A consensus microsatellite-based linkage map of the turbot (Scophthalmus maximus) was constructed from two unrelated families. The mapping panel was derived from a gynogenetic family of 96 haploid embryos and a biparental diploid family of 85 full-sib progeny with known linkage phase. A total of 242 microsatellites were mapped in 26 linkage groups, six markers remaining unlinked. The consensus map length was 1343.2 cM, with an average distance between markers of 6.5 +/- 0.5 cM. Similar length of female and male maps was evidenced. However, the mean recombination at common intervals throughout the genome revealed significant differences between sexes, approximately 1.6 times higher in the female than in the male. The comparison of turbot microsatellite flanking sequences against the Tetraodon nigroviridis genome revealed 55 significant matches, with a mean length of 102 bp and high sequence similarity (81-100%). The comparative mapping revealed significant syntenic regions among fish species. This study represents the first linkage map in the turbot, one of the most important flatfish in European aquaculture. This map will be suitable for QTL identification of productive traits in this species and for further evolutionary studies in fish and vertebrate species.

Indexed as

Chromosome MappingGenetic LinkageMicrosatellite RepeatsAnimalsFemaleFlatfishesGenomeMaleRecombination, GeneticSynteny

Identifiers

PMID18073440
PMCPMC2219478

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.