ArticleFrontiers in genetics2015
Ribosomal accretion, apriorism and the phylogenetic method: a response to Petrov and Williams.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- On the origin of life: an RNA-focused synthesis and narrative.RNA (New York, N.Y.) · 2023Article
- A Short Tale of the Origin of Proteins and Ribosome Evolution.Microorganisms · 2022Review
- Menzerath-Altmann's Law of Syntax in RNA Accretion History.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- First arrived, first served: competition between codons for codon-amino acid stereochemical interactions determined early genetic code assignments.Die Naturwissenschaften · 2020Article
- Microbiome digital signature of MCR genes - anAccess microbiology · 2019Article
- Piecemeal Buildup of the Genetic Code, Ribosomes, and Genomes from Primordial tRNA Building Blocks.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2016Article
- Commentary: History of the ribosome and the origin of translation.Frontiers in molecular biosciences · 2016Article
- Computing the origin and evolution of the ribosome from its structure - Uncovering processes of macromolecular accretion benefiting synthetic biology.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2015Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Historical (ideographic) and non-historical (nomothetic) studies of ribosomal accretion appear to arrive at diametrically opposite conclusions. Phylogenetic analysis of thousands of RNA molecules and protein structures in hundreds of genomes supports the structural origin of the ribosome in RNA decoding and ribosomal mechanics. Predictions from extant features in a handful of rRNA structural models of the large ribosomal subunit support its origin in protein biosynthesis. In recent correspondence, one of us reported that correcting dismissals of conflicting data and avoiding unwarranted assumptions of the nomothetic method reconciled conclusions. In response, Petrov and Williams dismissed our arguments claiming we did not understand their algorithmic model of ribosomal apical growth. Instead, they controverted the historical approach. Here we show that their objections to the phylogenetic method are unjustified, that their algorithm subjectively guarantees back-in-time molecular deconstructions toward the protein biosynthetic core, and that processes of ribosomal growth are much more complex. We prompt abandoning apriorism, decreasing ad hoc hypotheses and integrating historical and non-historical scientific methods.
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.