Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22206462›Full record

ArticleBMC biology2011

Difficult phylogenetic questions: more data, maybe; better methods, certainly.

Hervé Philippe, Béatrice Roure

Abstract readEditorialComment
In one paragraph

Article in BMC biology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. The complete chloroplast genome ofEcology and evolution · 2020
    Article
  7. Reduced Genome of the Gut Symbiotic Bacterium "Frontiers in microbiology · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. BIR Pipeline for Preparation of Phylogenomic Data.Evolutionary bioinformatics online · 2015
    Review
  19. Phylotranscriptomic analysis of the origin and early diversification of land plants.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2014
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Hervé PhilippeDépartement de Biochimie, Centre Robert-Cedergren, Université de Montréal, Succursale Centre-Ville, Montréal, Québec H3C 3J7, Canada. herve.philippe@umontreal.ca
Béatrice Roure

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Contradicting the prejudice that endosymbiosis is a rare phenomenon, Husník and co-workers show in BMC Biology that bacterial endosymbiosis has occured several times independently during insect evolution. Rigorous phylogenetic analyses, in particular using complex models of sequence evolution and an original site removal procedure, allow this conclusion to be established after eschewing inference artefacts that usually plague the positioning of highly divergent endosymbiont genomic sequences.

Indexed as

PhylogenySymbiosisEnterobacteriaceae

Identifiers

PMID22206462
PMCPMC3248379

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.