ArticleFunctional & integrative genomics2016
An analysis of the validity and utility of the proximon proposition.
Article in Functional & integrative genomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
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
The utilization of metagenomic functional interactions represents a key technique for metagenomic functional annotation efforts. By definition, metagenomic operons represent such interactions, but many operon predictions protocols rely on information about orthology and/or gene function that is frequently unavailable for metagenomic genes. Recently, the concept of the metagenomic proximon was proposed for use in metagenomic scenarios where supplemental information is sparse. In this paper, we examine the validity and utility of the proximon proposition by measuring the extent to which proximons emulate actual operons. Using the Escherichia coli K-12 genome, we compare proximons and operons from the same genome and observe the configurations and cardinalities among their corresponding mappings. The results demonstrate that the vast majority of proximons map discretely to a single operon in a conservative fashion where a typical proximon is synonymous to an equivalent or truncated operon. However, a large proportion of operons had no corresponding mappings to any proximon. Various perspectives of operon and proximon intersection are discussed, along with the potential limitations for proximon detection and usage.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26839085What 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.