Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23801671›Full record

ReviewWiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology

From genes to function: the C. elegans genetic toolbox.

Thomas Boulin, Oliver Hobert

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Developmental biology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. eLife · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. A Markovian dynamics forProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. ABiology open · 2021
    Article
  12. Sleep Analysis in AdultThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Phenotypic Screening inPharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  15. Caenorhabditis elegans: a model to understand host-microbe interactions.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2020
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

2 authors.

Thomas BoulinDepartment of Biology, Institut de Biologie de l'École Normale Supérieure, Paris, France. boulin@biologie.ens.fr
Oliver Hobert

Funding

LIM HOMEOBOX GENE LIM-6 IN MOTOR NEURON DIFFERENTIATIONR01NS039996 · NINDS · COLUMBIA UNIV NEW YORK MORNINGSIDE · PI Oliver Hobert · 2001 to 2026
$6.8M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS039996
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review aims to provide an overview of the technologies which make the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans an attractive genetic model system. We describe transgenesis techniques and forward and reverse genetic approaches to isolate mutants and clone genes. In addition, we discuss the new possibilities offered by genome engineering strategies and next-generation genome analysis tools.

Indexed as

Genes, HelminthAnimalsCaenorhabditis elegansChromosome MappingComparative Genomic HybridizationMutagenesisPolymorphism, Single NucleotideRNA Interference

Identifiers

PMID23801671
PMCPMC3694748

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.