ArticlePhotosynthesis research2008
Phototroph genomics ten years on.
Article in Photosynthesis research, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subcellular pigment distribution is altered under far-red light acclimation in cyanobacteria that contain chlorophyll f.Photosynthesis research · 2017Article
- Computational analysis of photosynthetic systems.Photosynthesis research · 2008Article
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
The onset of the genome era means different things to different people, but it is clear that this new age brings with it paradigm shifts that will forever affect biological research. Less clear is just how these shifts are changing the scope and scale of research. Are gigabases of raw data more useful than a single well-understood gene? Do we really need a full genome to understand the physiology of a single organism? The photosynthetic field is poised at the periphery of the bulk of genome sequencing work--understandably skewed toward health-related disciplines--and, as such, is subject to different motivations, limitations, and primary focus for each new genome. To understand some of these differences, we focus here on various indicators of the impact that genomics has had on the photosynthetic community, now a full decade since the publication of the first photosynthetic genome. Many useful indicators are indexed in public databases, providing pre- and post-genome sequence snapshots of changes in factors such as publication rate, number of proteins characterized, and sequenced genome coverage versus known diversity. As more genomes are sequenced and metagenomic projects begin to pour out billions of bases, it becomes crucial to understand how to harness this data in order to accumulate possible benefits and avoid possible pitfalls, especially as resources become increasingly directed toward natural environments governed by photosynthetic activity, ranging from hot springs to tropical forest ecosystems to the open ocean.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18568416What 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.