ArticlePeerJ2016
Systematics of stalked jellyfishes (Cnidaria: Staurozoa).
Article in PeerJ, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Regression of juvenile tentacles is driven by loss of cell proliferation inbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Article
- The Palaeobiology of Two Crown Group Cnidarians:Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Reproductive and environmental traits explain the variation in egg size among Medusozoa (Cnidaria).Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Review
- A macroscopic free-swimming medusa from the middle Cambrian Burgess Shale.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2023Article
- Mitochondrial genome comparison reveals the evolution of cnidarians.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Description of a common stauromedusa on the Pacific Coast of the United States and Canada,PeerJ · 2023Article
- The genome sequence of the spotted kaleidoscope jellyfish,Wellcome open research · 2023Article
- Spatial Distribution of MedusaZoological studies · 2020Article
- Article
- Eyes in Staurozoa (Cnidaria): a review.PeerJ · 2019Article
- Advances in DNA Barcoding of Toxic Marine Organisms.International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- Comparative internal anatomy of Staurozoa (Cnidaria), with functional and evolutionary inferences.PeerJ · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Staurozoan classification is highly subjective, based on phylogeny-free inferences, and suborders, families, and genera are commonly defined by homoplasies. Additionally, many characters used in the taxonomy of the group have ontogenetic and intraspecific variation, and demand new and consistent assessments to establish their correct homologies. Consequently, Staurozoa is in need of a thorough systematic revision. The aim of this study is to propose a comprehensive phylogenetic hypothesis for Staurozoa, providing the first phylogenetic classification for the group. According to our working hypothesis based on a combined set of molecular data (mitochondrial markers COI and 16S, and nuclear markers ITS, 18S, and 28S), the traditional suborders Cleistocarpida (animals with claustrum) and Eleutherocarpida (animals without claustrum) are not monophyletic. Instead, our results show that staurozoans are divided into two groups, herein named Amyostaurida and Myostaurida, which can be distinguished by the absence/presence of interradial longitudinal muscles in the peduncle, respectively. We propose a taxonomic revision at the family and genus levels that preserves the monophyly of taxa. We provide a key for staurozoan genera and discuss the evolution of the main characters used in staurozoan taxonomy.
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.