Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27450111›Full record

ReviewTrends in microbiology2016

Driving Apart and Segregating Genomes in Archaea.

Daniela Barillà

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Archaeal transcription.Transcription · 2020
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Mosaic origin of the eukaryotic kinetochore.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Archaeal imaging: leading the hunt for new discoveries.Molecular biology of the cell · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Daniela BarillàDepartment of Biology, University of York, York YO10 5DD, UK. Electronic address: daniela.barilla@york.ac.uk.
University of York · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F012004/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome segregation is a fundamental biological process in organisms from all domains of life. How this stage of the cell cycle unfolds in Eukarya has been clearly defined and considerable progress has been made to unravel chromosome partition in Bacteria. The picture is still elusive in Archaea. The lineages of this domain exhibit different cell-cycle lifestyles and wide-ranging chromosome copy numbers, fluctuating from 1 up to 55. This plurality of patterns suggests that a variety of mechanisms might underpin disentangling and delivery of DNA molecules to daughter cells. Here I describe recent developments in archaeal genome maintenance, including investigations of novel genome segregation machines that point to unforeseen bacterial and eukaryotic connections.

Indexed as

Genome, ArchaealArchaeaArchaeal ProteinsBacteriaCell CycleConserved SequenceDNADNA ReplicationEukaryotic CellsPlasmidsArchaeal ProteinsDNAArchaea.chromosomegenome segregationplasmid

Identifiers

PMID27450111
PMCPMC5120986
OpenAlexW2495169411

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.