ArticleJournal of applied genetics2013
Analysis of genetic variability and phylogenetic analysis of selected Czech and French strains of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV).
Article in Journal of applied genetics, 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
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to analyse the genetic variability and phylogenetic analysis of six strains of rabbit haemorrhagic disease virus (RHDV), including four Czech strains (CAMPV-351, CAMPV-561, CAMPV-562, CAMPV-558) and two French strains (Fr-1, Fr-2), on the basis of a fragment of the VP60 capsid structural protein-coding gene N-terminal region. The results of our own studies were compared to 26 RHDV strains obtained from GenBank. The analysis of the genetic variability of six RHDV strains indicated that the CAMPV-561 strain is the most genetically variable. Less variable were the Fr-1 and Fr-2 strains, while the least variable was CAMPV-351. In turn, the genetic distance among the six analysed strains and 26 strains obtained from GenBank was the greatest for CAMPV-351 and Whn/China [11.3 % according to the observed divergence (OD) method and 12.2 % according to the maximum likelihood (ML) method], while it was the lowest for CAMPV-351 and FRG (0.8 % in both the OD and ML methods). In turn, the scale of the genetic distances among the six analysed strains and five RHDVa strains (99-05, NY-01, Whn/China, Triptis, Iowa2000) ranged from 9.3-10.3 % in the OD method to 10.3-13.7 % in the ML method. The image of phylogenetic dependencies generated for the strains analysed and those obtained from GenBank revealed their distribution to be in five genetic groups (G1-G5), whereas the analysed strains were included in genetic groups 2 and 3.
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.