Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27368698›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2016

Comparative genomics reveals multiple pathways to mutualism for tick-borne pathogens.

Svetlana Lockwood, Kelly A Brayton, Shira L Broschat

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. The microbiota changes of the brown dog tick,Frontiers in physiology · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Draft Genome Sequences ofGenome announcements · 2018
    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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

Svetlana LockwoodSchool of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Washington State University, P.O. Box 642752, Pullman, USA.
Kelly A BraytonDepartment of Veterinary Microbiology and Pathology, Washington State University, P.O. Box 647040, Pullman, 99164-7040, USA.
Shira L BroschatSchool of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Washington State University, P.O. Box 642752, Pullman, USA. shira@eecs.wsu.edu.
Washington State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMultiple important human and livestock pathogens employ ticks as their primary host vectors. It is not currently known whether this means of infecting a host arose once or many times during evolution.

resultsIn order to address this question, we conducted a comparative genomics analysis on a set of bacterial pathogens from seven genera - Borrelia, Rickettsia, Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, Francisella, Coxiella, and Bartonella, including species from three different host vectors - ticks, lice, and fleas. The final set of 102 genomes used in the study encoded a total of 120,046 protein sequences. We found that no genes or metabolic pathways were present in all tick-borne bacteria. However, we found some genes and pathways were present in subsets of tick-transmitted organisms while absent from bacteria transmitted by lice or fleas.

conclusionOur analysis suggests that the ability of pathogens to be transmitted by ticks arose multiple times over the course of evolution. To our knowledge, this is the most comprehensive study of tick transmissibility to date.

Indexed as

MetagenomeMetagenomicsAnimalsBacteriaCluster AnalysisComputational BiologyHumansMetabolic Networks and PathwaysPhthirapteraPhylogenySiphonapteraTick-Borne DiseasesComparative genomicsPhylogenomic networkTick-borne pathogens

Identifiers

PMID27368698
PMCPMC4930560
OpenAlexW2282703641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.