Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23093601›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2013

DoriC 5.0: an updated database of oriC regions in both bacterial and archaeal genomes.

Feng Gao, Hao Luo, Chun-Ting Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 92 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
92citing 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

92 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Analysis of 3'-seq data from multiplebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Genome diversity of domesticatedMicrobial genomics · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Optimal Permutation Recovery in Permuted Monotone Matrix Model.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

32 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Feng GaoDepartment of Physics, Tianjin University, Tianjin 300072, China. fgao@tju.edu.cn
Hao Luo
Chun-Ting Zhang

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Replication of chromosomes is one of the central events in the cell cycle. Chromosome replication begins at specific sites, called origins of replication (oriCs), for all three domains of life. However, the origins of replication still remain unknown in a considerably large number of bacterial and archaeal genomes completely sequenced so far. The availability of increasing complete bacterial and archaeal genomes has created challenges and opportunities for identification of their oriCs in silico, as well as in vivo. Based on the Z-curve theory, we have developed a web-based system Ori-Finder to predict oriCs in bacterial genomes with high accuracy and reliability by taking advantage of comparative genomics, and the predicted oriC regions have been organized into an online database DoriC, which is publicly available at http://tubic.tju.edu.cn/doric/ since 2007. Five years after we constructed DoriC, the database has significant advances over the number of bacterial genomes, increasing about 4-fold. Additionally, oriC regions in archaeal genomes identified by in vivo experiments, as well as in silico analyses, have also been added to the database. Consequently, the latest release of DoriC contains oriCs for >1500 bacterial genomes and 81 archaeal genomes, respectively.

Indexed as

Databases, Nucleic AcidGenome, ArchaealGenome, BacterialReplication OriginDNA, ArchaealDNA, BacterialInternetDNA, ArchaealDNA, Bacterial

Identifiers

PMID23093601
PMCPMC3531139

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.