Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20177425›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Genetics2010

Towards genome-scale signalling network reconstructions.

Daniel R Hyduke, Bernhard Ø Palsson

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Genetics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing 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

58 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Evaluating plant growth-defense trade-offs by modeling the interaction between primary and secondary metabolism.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. D-Xylose Sensing inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Current Challenges in Plant Systems Biology.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

2 authors.

Daniel R HydukeDepartment of Bioengineering, University of California-San Diego, 9500 Gilman Drive, La Jolla, California 92093-0412, USA. hyduke@ucsd.edu
Bernhard Ø Palsson

Funding

SURFACE CHEMISTRY OF MYCOBACTERIAR01AI008401 · NIAID · NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH · PI GOREN, MAYER B. · 1989 to 1989
–
SURFACE CHEMISTRY OF MYCOBACTERIAR22AI008401 · NIAID · NATIONAL JEWISH HEALTH · PI GOREN, MAYER B. · 1985 to 1989
–
NIAID NIH HHS Y1-AI-8401-01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biological signalling networks allow living organisms to issue an integrated response to current conditions and make limited predictions about future environmental changes. Small-scale dynamic models of signalling cascades, including mitogen-activated protein kinase cascades, have been developed to generate hypotheses about signal transduction. Owing to technical limitations, these models and the hypotheses they generate have focused on a limited subset of signalling molecules. Now that we can simultaneously measure a substantial portion of the molecular components of a cell, we can begin to develop and test systems-level models of cellular signalling and regulatory processes, therefore gaining insights into the 'thought' processes of a cell.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksAnimalsGenomicsHumansMetabolic Networks and PathwaysModels, BiologicalModels, GeneticSignal TransductionSystems Biology

Identifiers

PMID20177425

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.