Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21153876›Full record

ArticleVirus genes2011

Characterization of indels in poxvirus genomes.

Danielle Coulson, Chris Upton

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Virus genes, 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
–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

28 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Orthopoxvirus Genome Sequencing, Assembly, and Analysis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. High-resolution mapping reveals the mechanism and contribution of genome insertions and deletions to RNA virus evolution.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Poxvirus Recombination.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  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

2 authors.

Danielle CoulsonDepartment of Biochemistry and Microbiology, University of Victoria, Victoria, BC, V8W 3P6, Canada.
Chris Upton

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

By comparing sets of variola virus (VARV) genomes and sets of vaccinia virus (VACV) genomes, it was found that the insertion and deletion of small pieces of DNA (3-25 nucleotides) were common events among these poxviruses. Insertion events were characterized by the creation of tandem direct repeats, whereas the deletion events generally took place between two direct repeats that were separated by a few nucleotides. A number of the VARV and VACV indels clearly did not fit the expected phylogenetic tree patterns. Some of these were found to be the result of coincident events, but others, in VACV, suggest recombination among the VACV genomes. Such recombination would make the construction of phylogenetic trees problematic. The growth of VACV under artificial conditions and at high multiplicities does not select against these deletions.

Indexed as

DNA, ViralGenome, ViralINDEL MutationDNA Mutational AnalysisGene DeletionMutagenesis, InsertionalPhylogenyTandem Repeat SequencesVaccinia virusVariola virusDNA, Viral

Identifiers

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.