ArticleF1000Research2015
Strain-specific and pooled genome sequences for populations of Drosophila melanogaster from three continents.
Article in F1000Research, 2015. 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
- From sub-Saharan Africa to China: Evolutionary history and adaptation ofScience advances · 2024Article
- The discovery, distribution, and diversity of DNA viruses associated withVirus evolution · 2021Article
- Population Genomics on the Fly: Recent Advances in Drosophila.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2020Review
- Phylogeny of the GenusGenetics · 2018Review
- Insights into DDT Resistance from theGenetics · 2017Article
- Genomic analysis ofPeerJ · 2017Article
- A Thousand Fly Genomes: An Expanded Drosophila Genome Nexus.Molecular biology and evolution · 2016Article
- Unique transposon landscapes are pervasive across Drosophila melanogaster genomes.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
- Strain-specific and pooled genome sequences for populations of Drosophila melanogaster from three continents.F1000Research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
To contribute to our general understanding of the evolutionary forces that shape variation in genome sequences in nature, we have sequenced genomes from 50 isofemale lines and six pooled samples from populations of Drosophila melanogaster on three continents. Analysis of raw and reference-mapped reads indicates the quality of these genomic sequence data is very high. Comparison of the predicted and experimentally-determined Wolbachia infection status of these samples suggests that strain or sample swaps are unlikely to have occurred in the generation of these data. Genome sequences are freely available in the European Nucleotide Archive under accession ERP009059. Isofemale lines can be obtained from the Drosophila Species Stock Center.
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.