Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27053733›Full record

ReviewPhysiology (Bethesda, Md.)2016

Evolutionary Specialization of Tactile Perception in Vertebrates.

Eve R Schneider, Elena O Gracheva, Slav N Bagriantsev

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Physiology (Bethesda, Md.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Evolution of sensory organs: Lessons from walking fish.Current opinion in neurobiology · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Expanding Aesthetics.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2022
    Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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.

Eve R SchneiderDepartment of Cellular & Molecular Physiology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut;
Elena O GrachevaDepartment of Cellular & Molecular Physiology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Program in Cellular Neuroscience, Neurodegeneration and Repair, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; and Department of Neuroscience, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut slav.bagriantsev@yale.edu elena.gracheva@yale.edu.
Slav N BagriantsevDepartment of Cellular & Molecular Physiology, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; slav.bagriantsev@yale.edu elena.gracheva@yale.edu.

Funding

RESEARCH IN PERINATAL MEDICINET32HD007094 · NICHD · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI GALLAGHER, PATRICK G · 1985 to 2015
$3.6M
The role of TRPM8 and Nav1.8 channels in cold tolerance of hibernatorsR01NS091300 · NINDS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI GRACHEVA, ELENA · 2015 to 2020
$2.4M
NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD-007094NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007094NINDS NIH HHS 1R01 NS-091300-01A1NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS091300
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evolution has endowed vertebrates with the remarkable tactile ability to explore the world through the perception of physical force. Yet the sense of touch remains one of the least well understood senses at the cellular and molecular level. Vertebrates specializing in tactile perception can highlight general principles of mechanotransduction. Here, we review cellular and molecular adaptations that underlie the sense of touch in typical and acutely mechanosensitive vertebrates.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionVertebratesAnimalsBehavior, AnimalHumansMechanotransduction, CellularTouchTouch Perception

Identifiers

PMID27053733
PMCPMC5005274

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.