Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21093095›Full record

ReviewTrends in ecology & evolution2011

Stoichiogenomics: the evolutionary ecology of macromolecular elemental composition.

James J Elser, Claudia Acquisti, Sudhir Kumar

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in ecology & evolution, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Is the Genetic Code Optimized for Resource Conservation?Molecular biology and evolution · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

James J ElserSchool of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-4501, USA.
Claudia Acquisti
Sudhir Kumar
Arizona State University · US

Funding

COMPARATIVE MOLECULAR SEQUENCE ANALYSISR01HG002096 · NHGRI · ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY-TEMPE CAMPUS · PI KUMAR, SUDHIR · 2000 to 2013
$3.0M
NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG002096
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The new field of 'stoichiogenomics' integrates evolution, ecology and bioinformatics to reveal surprising patterns of the differential usage of key elements [e.g. nitrogen (N)] in proteins and nucleic acids. Because the canonical amino acids as well as nucleotides differ in element counts, natural selection owing to limited element supplies might bias monomer usage to reduce element costs. For example, proteins that respond to N limitation in microbes use a lower proportion of N-rich amino acids, whereas proteome- and transcriptome-wide element contents differ significantly for plants as compared with animals, probably because of the differential severity of element limitations. In this review, we show that with these findings, new directions for future investigations are emerging, particularly via the increasing availability of diverse metagenomic and metatranscriptomic data sets.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionEcosystemGenomicsStochastic ProcessesAnimalsPlantsSelection, Genetic

Identifiers

PMID21093095
PMCPMC3010507
OpenAlexW2169264292

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.