Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25903626›Full record

ReviewNature2015

Scenarios for the making of vertebrates.

Nicholas D Holland, Linda Z Holland, Peter W H Holland

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The Metameric Echinoderm.Integrative organismal biology (Oxford, England) · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. A Preliminary Single-Cell RNA-Seq Analysis of Embryonic Cells That ExpressFrontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. The evolutionary origin of chordate segmentation: revisiting the enterocoel theory.Theory in biosciences = Theorie in den Biowissenschaften · 2018
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Structural Biology and Evolution of the TGF-β Family.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology · 2016
    Review
  15. Nervous systems and scenarios for the invertebrate-to-vertebrate transition.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
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.

Nicholas D HollandMarine Biology Research Division, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA.
Linda Z HollandMarine Biology Research Division, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093, USA.
Peter W H HollandDepartment of Zoology, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PS, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past 200 years, almost every invertebrate phylum has been proposed as a starting point for evolving vertebrates. Most of these scenarios are outdated, but several are still seriously considered. The short-range transition from ancestral invertebrate chordates (similar to amphioxus and tunicates) to vertebrates is well accepted. However, longer-range transitions leading up to the invertebrate chordates themselves are more controversial. Opinion is divided between the annelid and the enteropneust scenarios, predicting, respectively, a complex or a simple ancestor for bilaterian animals. Deciding between these ideas will be facilitated by further comparative studies of multicellular animals, including enigmatic taxa such as xenacoelomorphs.

Indexed as

PhylogenyVertebratesAnimalsAnnelidaInvertebratesModels, BiologicalResearch

Identifiers

PMID25903626

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.