ArticleBMC genomics2011
CAMBer: an approach to support comparative analysis of multiple bacterial strains.
Article in BMC genomics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative genomics and pangenome-oriented studies reveal high homogeneity of the agronomically relevant enterobacterial plant pathogen Dickeya solani.BMC genomics · 2020Article
- A brief review of software tools for pangenomics.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2015Review
- Genome analysis reveals three genomospecies in Mycobacterium abscessus.BMC genomics · 2014Article
- eCAMBer: efficient support for large-scale comparative analysis of multiple bacterial strains.BMC bioinformatics · 2014Article
- Bioinformatics and computational biology in Poland.PLoS computational biology · 2013Article
- Comparative genomics of 12 strains of Erwinia amylovora identifies a pan-genome with a large conserved core.PloS one · 2013Article
- An approach to identifying drug resistance associated mutations in bacterial strains.BMC genomics · 2012Article
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
backgroundThere is a large amount of inconsistency in gene structure annotations of bacterial strains. This inconsistency is a frustrating impedance to effective comparative genomic analysis of bacterial strains in promising applications such as gaining insights into bacterial drug resistance.
resultsHere, we propose CAMBer as an approach to support comparative analysis of multiple bacterial strains. CAMBer produces what we called multigene families. Each multigene family reveals genes that are in one-to-one correspondence in the bacterial strains, thereby permitting their annotations to be integrated. We present results of our method applied to three human pathogens: Escherichia coli, Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Staphylococcus aureus.
conclusionsAs a result, more accurate and more comprehensive annotations of the bacterial strains can be produced.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.