Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20885817›Full record

ArticleCurrent genomics2010

Genetic interference: don't stand so close to me.

Luke E Berchowitz, Gregory P Copenhaver

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current genomics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 152 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
152citing papers in PubMed
16.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

152 citing papers in PubMed, 235 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. High-resolution global recombination mapping inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

92 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luke E BerchowitzDepartment of Biology and the Carolina Center for Genome Sciences, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599-3280, USA.
Gregory P Copenhaver
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meiosis is a dynamic process during which chromosomes undergo condensation, pairing, crossing-over and disjunction. Stringent regulation of the distribution and quantity of meiotic crossovers is critical for proper chromosome segregation in many organisms. In humans, aberrant crossover placement and the failure to faithfully segregate meiotic chromosomes often results in severe genetic disorders such as Down syndrome and Edwards syndrome. In most sexually reproducing organisms, crossovers are more evenly spaced than would be expected from a random distribution. This phenomenon, termed interference, was first reported in the early 20(th) century by Drosophila geneticists and has been subsequently observed in a vast range of organisms from yeasts to humans. Yet, many questions regarding the behavior and mechanism of interference remain poorly understood. In this review, we examine results new and old, from a wide range of organisms, to begin to understand the progress and remaining challenges to understanding the fundamental unanswered questions regarding genetic interference.

Indexed as

chromosome Spo11crossoverDouble-strand breakMeiosisPch2.Rec8recombinationsynaptonemal complex

Identifiers

PMID20885817
PMCPMC2874225
OpenAlexW2172088034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.