Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24899665›Full record

ArticleMolecular biology and evolution2014

Limited utility of residue masking for positive-selection inference.

Stephanie J Spielman, Eric T Dawson, Claus O Wilke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular biology and evolution, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Stephanie J SpielmanDepartment of Integrative Biology, Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, and Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biology, The University of Texas at Austin stephanie.spielman@gmail.com.
Eric T DawsonDepartment of Integrative Biology, Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, and Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biology, The University of Texas at Austin.
Claus O WilkeDepartment of Integrative Biology, Center for Computational Biology and Bioinformatics, and Institute of Cellular and Molecular Biology, The University of Texas at Austin.

Funding

The biophysical basis of translational selectionR01GM088344 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI BARRICK, JEFFREY EVAN, WILKE, CLAUS O · 2009 to 2023
$3.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM088344
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Errors in multiple sequence alignments (MSAs) can reduce accuracy in positive-selection inference. Therefore, it has been suggested to filter MSAs before conducting further analyses. One widely used filter, Guidance, allows users to remove MSA positions aligned with low confidence. However, Guidance's utility in positive-selection inference has been disputed in the literature. We have conducted an extensive simulation-based study to characterize fully how Guidance impacts positive-selection inference, specifically for protein-coding sequences of realistic divergence levels. We also investigated whether novel scoring algorithms, which phylogenetically corrected confidence scores, and a new gap-penalization score-normalization scheme improved Guidance's performance. We found that no filter, including original Guidance, consistently benefitted positive-selection inferences. Moreover, all improvements detected were exceedingly minimal, and in certain circumstances, Guidance-based filters worsened inferences.

Indexed as

Computational BiologyComputer SimulationProteinsSelection, GeneticSequence AlignmentSoftwareProteinsalignment filtersmultiple sequence alignmentpositive-selection inferencesequence simulation

Identifiers

PMID24899665
PMCPMC4137709

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.