Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23733847›Full record

ArticleGenetics2013

The modest beginnings of one genome project.

David B Kaback

Open access · bronzeAbstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 42% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

David B KabackDepartment of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ 07103, USA. kaback@umdnj.edu
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

One of the top things on a geneticist's wish list has to be a set of mutants for every gene in their particular organism. Such a set was produced for the yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae near the end of the 20th century by a consortium of yeast geneticists. However, the functional genomic analysis of one chromosome, its smallest, had already begun more than 25 years earlier as a project that was designed to define most or all of that chromosome's essential genes by temperature-sensitive lethal mutations. When far fewer than expected genes were uncovered, the relatively new field of molecular cloning enabled us and indeed, the entire community of yeast researchers to approach this problem more definitively. These studies ultimately led to cloning, genomic sequencing, and the production and phenotypic analysis of the entire set of knockout mutations for this model organism as well as a better concept of what defines an essential function, a wish fulfilled that enables this model eukaryote to continue at the forefront of research in modern biology.

Indexed as

Genome, FungalChromosomes, FungalGenes, EssentialGenetics, MicrobialGenomicsHistory, 20th CenturyPhysical Chromosome MappingSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSequence Analysis, DNA

Identifiers

PMID23733847
PMCPMC3664842
OpenAlexW2149974106

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.