Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24058822›Full record

ReviewWorm2012

Toward 959 nematode genomes.

Sujai Kumar, Georgios Koutsovoulos, Gaganjot Kaur, Mark Blaxter

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Worm, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Characterization of FiveInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. All the microbiology nematodes can teach us.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2016
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  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

4 authors.

Sujai KumarInstitute of Evolutionary Biology; University of Edinburgh; Edinburgh, UK.
Georgios Koutsovoulos
Gaganjot Kaur
Mark Blaxter

Funding

Medical Research Council G0900740Medical Research Council MR/K001744/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sequencing of the complete genome of the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans was a landmark achievement and ushered in a new era of whole-organism, systems analyses of the biology of this powerful model organism. The success of the C. elegans genome sequencing project also inspired communities working on other organisms to approach genome sequencing of their species. The phylum Nematoda is rich and diverse and of interest to a wide range of research fields from basic biology through ecology and parasitic disease. For all these communities, it is now clear that access to genome scale data will be key to advancing understanding, and in the case of parasites, developing new ways to control or cure diseases. The advent of second-generation sequencing technologies, improvements in computing algorithms and infrastructure and growth in bioinformatics and genomics literacy is making the addition of genome sequencing to the research goals of any nematode research program a less daunting prospect. To inspire, promote and coordinate genomic sequencing across the diversity of the phylum, we have launched a community wiki and the 959 Nematode Genomes initiative (www.nematodegenomes.org/). Just as the deciphering of the developmental lineage of the 959 cells of the adult hermaphrodite C. elegans was the gateway to broad advances in biomedical science, we hope that a nematode phylogeny with (at least) 959 sequenced species will underpin further advances in understanding the origins of parasitism, the dynamics of genomic change and the adaptations that have made Nematoda one of the most successful animal phyla.

Indexed as

genomenematodenext-generation sequencingsecond-generation sequencingwiki

Identifiers

PMID24058822
PMCPMC3670170

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.