ArticleZooKeys2016
Taxonomic hypotheses regarding the genus Gerbillus (Rodentia, Muridae, Gerbillinae) based on molecular analyses of museum specimens.
Article in ZooKeys, 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Host competence of AlgerianInternational journal for parasitology. Parasites and wildlife · 2023Article
- Potentially Zoonotic Viruses in Wild Rodents, United Arab Emirates, 2019-A Pilot Study.Viruses · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Methodological improvements now allow routine analyses of highly degraded DNA samples as found in museum specimens. Using these methods could be useful in studying such groups as rodents of the genus Gerbillus for which i) the taxonomy is still highly debated, ii) collection of fresh specimens may prove difficult. Here we address precise taxonomic questions using a small portion of the cytochrome b gene obtained from 45 dry skin/skull museum samples (from 1913 to 1974) originating from two African and three Asian countries. The specimens were labelled Gerbillus gerbillus, Gerbillus andersoni, Gerbillus nanus, Gerbillus amoenus, Gerbillus perpallidus and Gerbillus pyramidum, and molecular results mostly confirmed these assignations. The close relationship between Gerbillus nanus (Asian origin) and Gerbillus amoenus (African origin) confirmed that they represent vicariant sibling species which differentiated in allopatry on either side of the Red Sea. In the closely related Gerbillus perpallidus and Gerbillus pyramidum, specimens considered as belonging to one Gerbillus pyramidum subspecies (Gerbillus pyramidum floweri) appeared closer to Gerbillus perpallidus suggesting that they (Gerbillus pyramidum floweri and Gerbillus perpallidus) may represent a unique species, distributed on both sides of the Nile River, for which the correct name should be Gerbillus floweri. Furthermore, the three other Gerbillus pyramidum subspecies grouped together with no apparent genetic structure suggesting that they may not yet represent genetically differentiated lineages. This study confirms the importance of using these methods on museum samples, which can open new perspectives in this particular group as well as in other groups of interest.
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.