Considerations for the inclusion of 2x mammalian genomes in phylogenetic analyses.

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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Hybrid de novo genome assembly and centromere characterization of the gray mouse lemur (Microcebus murinus).BMC biology · 2017
   Article
2. Ensembl comparative genomics resources.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2016
   Article
3. Extensive error in the number of genes inferred from draft genome assemblies.PLoS computational biology · 2014
   Article
4. Large-scale analysis of microRNA evolution.BMC genomics · 2012
   Article
5. Controversies in modern evolutionary biology: the imperative for error detection and quality control.BMC genomics · 2012
   Article
6. Identifying single copy orthologs in Metazoa.PLoS computational biology · 2011
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  2x genomes--depth does matter.2010

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as