Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22545244›Full record

ArticleMobile genetic elements2011

Goods-thinking vs. tree-thinking: Finding a place for mobile genetic elements.

James McInerney, Carla Cummins, Leanne Haggerty

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Mobile genetic elements, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Tempos and modes of collectivity in the history of life.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2021
    Review
  2. Viruses and mobile elements as drivers of evolutionary transitions.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016
    Review
  3. 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

3 authors.

James McInerneyBioinformatics and Molecular Evolution Unit; Department of Biology; National University of Ireland Maynooth, Co.; Kildare, Ireland.
Carla Cummins
Leanne Haggerty

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

While it has become increasingly clear that the Tree of Life hypothesis has limitations in its ability to describe the evolution of all evolving entities on the planet, there has been a marked reluctance to move away from the tree-based language. Ironically, while modifying the idea of the Tree of Life to the extent that it is only very distantly related to its original descriptions, there has been a very careful attempt to retain the language of tree-thinking. The recent movement away from a tree-thinking language toward a goods-thinking language and perspective is a significant improvement. In this commentary, we describe how goods-thinking can provide better descriptions of evolution, can integrate evolution with environment more closely and can offer an equal place for Mobile Genetic Elements and chromosomal elements in discussions of evolutionary history.

Identifiers

PMID22545244
PMCPMC3337142

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.