ArticleJournal of theoretical biology2010
New method for comparing DNA primary sequences based on a discrimination measure.
Article in Journal of theoretical biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- An investigation into inter- and intragenomic variations of graphic genomic signatures.BMC bioinformatics · 2015Article
- DNA barcoding and species boundary delimitation of selected species of Chinese Acridoidea (Orthoptera: Caelifera).PloS one · 2013Article
- A novel hierarchical clustering algorithm for gene sequences.BMC bioinformatics · 2012Article
- Graphical and numerical representations of DNA sequences: statistical aspects of similarity.Journal of mathematical chemistry · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We introduce a new approach to compare DNA primary sequences. The core of our method is a new measure of pairwise distances among sequences. Using the primitive discrimination substrings of sequence S and Q, a discrimination measure DM(S, Q) is defined for the similarity analysis of them. The proposed method does not require multiple alignments and is fully automatic. To illustrate its utility, we construct phylogenetic trees on two independent data sets. The results indicate that the method is efficient and powerful.
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.