ArticleGenome biology and evolution2012
A new database (GCD) on genome composition for eukaryote and prokaryote genome sequences and their initial analyses.
Article in Genome biology and evolution, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structures and stability of simple DNA repeats from bacteria.The Biochemical journal · 2020Review
- Article
- Article
- Development of self-compressing BLSOM for comprehensive analysis of big sequence data.BioMed research international · 2015Article
- Amino Acid metabolism conflicts with protein diversity.Molecular biology and evolution · 2014Article
- Nucleosome Positioning.ISRN molecular biology · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Eukaryote genomes contain many noncoding regions, and they are quite complex. To understand these complexities, we constructed a database, Genome Composition Database, for the whole genome composition statistics for 101 eukaryote genome data, as well as more than 1,000 prokaryote genomes. Frequencies of all possible one to ten oligonucleotides were counted for each genome, and these observed values were compared with expected values computed under observed oligonucleotide frequencies of length 1-4. Deviations from expected values were much larger for eukaryotes than prokaryotes, except for fungal genomes. Mammalian genomes showed the largest deviation among animals. The results of comparison are available online at http://esper.lab.nig.ac.jp/genome-composition-database/.
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.