ArticlePloS one2014
The dawn of open access to phylogenetic data.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 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
23 citing papers in PubMed.
- From policy to practice: progress towards data- and code-sharing in ecology and evolution.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Open science interventions to improve reproducibility and replicability of research: a scoping review.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Computational Reproducibility of Molecular Phylogenies.Molecular biology and evolution · 2023Article
- PrioriTree: a utility for improving phylodynamic analyses in BEAST.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Article
- A network of change: united action on research integrity.BMC research notes · 2022Article
- UCEasy: A software package for automating and simplifying the analysis of ultraconserved elements (UCEs).Biodiversity data journal · 2021Article
- Every fifth published metagenome is not available to science.PLoS biology · 2020Article
- Where Do Early Career Researchers Stand on Open Science Practices? A Survey Within the Max Planck Society.Frontiers in research metrics and analytics · 2020Article
- A deafening silence: a lack of data and reproducibility in published bioacoustics research?Biodiversity data journal · 2019Article
- Article
- Implementation of informatics for integrating biology and the bedside (i2b2) platform as Docker containers.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2018Article
- Article
- Public availability of research data in dentistry journals indexed in Journal Citation Reports.Clinical oral investigations · 2018Article
- Article
- Badges to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency.PLoS biology · 2016Article
- Gauging the Purported Costs of Public Data Archiving for Long-Term Population Studies.PLoS biology · 2016Article
- Synthesis of phylogeny and taxonomy into a comprehensive tree of life.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The scientific enterprise depends critically on the preservation of and open access to published data. This basic tenet applies acutely to phylogenies (estimates of evolutionary relationships among species). Increasingly, phylogenies are estimated from increasingly large, genome-scale datasets using increasingly complex statistical methods that require increasing levels of expertise and computational investment. Moreover, the resulting phylogenetic data provide an explicit historical perspective that critically informs research in a vast and growing number of scientific disciplines. One such use is the study of changes in rates of lineage diversification (speciation--extinction) through time. As part of a meta-analysis in this area, we sought to collect phylogenetic data (comprising nucleotide sequence alignment and tree files) from 217 studies published in 46 journals over a 13-year period. We document our attempts to procure those data (from online archives and by direct request to corresponding authors), and report results of analyses (using Bayesian logistic regression) to assess the impact of various factors on the success of our efforts. Overall, complete phylogenetic data for [Formula: see text] of these studies are effectively lost to science. Our study indicates that phylogenetic data are more likely to be deposited in online archives and/or shared upon request when: (1) the publishing journal has a strong data-sharing policy; (2) the publishing journal has a higher impact factor, and; (3) the data are requested from faculty rather than students. Importantly, our survey spans recent policy initiatives and infrastructural changes; our analyses indicate that the positive impact of these community initiatives has been both dramatic and immediate. Although the results of our study indicate that the situation is dire, our findings also reveal tremendous recent progress in the sharing and preservation of phylogenetic data.
Indexed as
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.