ArticlePLoS currents2014
Best practices for data sharing in phylogenetic research.
Article in PLoS currents, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A Logical Model of Homology for Comparative Biology.Systematic biology · 2020Article
- Vascular plants from European Russia in the CSBG SB RAS Digital Herbarium.Biodiversity data journal · 2020Article
- JPhyloIO: a Java library for event-based reading and writing of different phylogenetic file formats through a common interface.BMC bioinformatics · 2019Article
- Automated Integration of Trees and Traits: A Case Study Using Paired Fin Loss Across Teleost Fishes.Systematic biology · 2018Article
- PhyloPen: Phylogenetic Tree Browsing Using a Pen and Touch Interface.PLoS currents · 2015Article
- Phylesystem: a git-based data store for community-curated phylogenetic estimates.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2015Article
- ReproPhylo: An Environment for Reproducible Phylogenomics.PLoS computational biology · 2015Article
- Visualising Geophylogenies in Web Maps Using GeoJSON.PLoS currents · 2015Article
- Moving the mountain: analysis of the effort required to transform comparative anatomy into computable anatomy.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As phylogenetic data becomes increasingly available, along with associated data on species' genomes, traits, and geographic distributions, the need to ensure data availability and reuse become more and more acute. In this paper, we provide ten "simple rules" that we view as best practices for data sharing in phylogenetic research. These rules will help lead towards a future phylogenetics where data can easily be archived, shared, reused, and repurposed across a wide variety of projects.
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.