ArticleJournal of applied genetics2010
FISH mapping in cattle (Bos taurus L.) is not yet out of fashion.
Article in Journal of applied genetics, 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.
- Molecular Cytogenetics in Domestic Bovids: A Review.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2023Review
- Comparative FISH mapping of BMPR1B, BMP15 and GDF9 fecundity genes on cattle, river buffalo, sheep and goat chromosomes.Journal of genetics · 2013Article
- Fluorescence in situ hybridization-based karyotyping of soybean translocation lines.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2011Article
- Fluorescence in situ hybridization mapping of six loci containing genes involved in the dioxin metabolism of domestic bovids.Journal of applied genetics · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Physical mapping of genes by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) seems to be out of fashion in species whose assembled genome sequences are available. However, in this work we evidence the existence of errors in gene location in the Btau_4.0 assembly. We show that DFNA5 and CHCHD6 genes are located on BTA4 and BTA22, respectively, instead of BTA10 and BTA3, as displayed by Btau_4.0. This report emphasizes the need to verify the data on physical localization of genes in the cattle genome (at least by taking into account comparative data reported in available papers) and the need to improve the cattle genome assembly. Our results indicate that FISH mapping in cattle is still useful.
Indexed as
Identifiers
21063067What 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.