ArticleAnnals of botany2013
Use or abuse of bioinformatic tools: a response to Samach.
Article in Annals of botany, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In a recent paper, we described for the first time the effects of fruit on the expression of putative homologues of genes involved in flowering pathways. It was our aim to provide insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying alternate bearing in citrus. However, a bioinformatics-based critique of our and other related papers has been given by Samach in the preceding Viewpoint article in this issue of Annals of Botany. The use of certain bioinformatic tools in a context of structural rather than functional genomics can cast doubts about the veracity of a large amount of data published in recent years. In this response, the contentions raised by Samach are analysed, and rebuttals of his criticisms are presented.
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.