ReviewBiopreservation and biobanking2017
A Review of Living Collections with Special Emphasis on Sustainability and Its Impact on Research Across Multiple Disciplines.
Review in Biopreservation and biobanking, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Quality matters: International standards for biobanking.Cell proliferation · 2022Review
- Geographical Isolation and Root-Associated Fungi in the Marine Terrains: A Step Toward Establishing a Strategy for Acquiring Unique Microbial Resources.Mycobiology · 2021Article
- Identification of oleaginous yeasts that metabolize aromatic compounds.Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology · 2020Article
- Fungal Clusters and Their Uniqueness in Geographically Segregated Wetlands: A Step Forward to Marsh Conservation for a Wealth of Future Fungal Resources.Mycobiology · 2020Article
- Phototrophic Co-cultures From Extreme Environments: Community Structure and Potential Value for Fundamental and Applied Research.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- Preservation, Characterization and Exploitation of Microbial Biodiversity: The Perspective of the Italian Network of Culture Collections.Microorganisms · 2019Review
- Public Microbial Resource Centers: Key Hubs for Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) Microorganisms and Genetic Materials.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2019Review
- Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Formal living collections have unique characteristics that distinguish them from other types of biorepositories. Comprising diverse resources, microbe culture collections, crop and biodiversity plant germplasm collections, and animal germplasm repositories are commonly allied with specific research communities or stakeholder groups. Among living collections, microbial culture collections have very long and unique life histories, with some being older than 100 years. Regulatory, financial, and technical developments have impacted living collections in many ways. International treaty obligations and restrictions on release of genetically modified organisms complicate the activities of living collections. Funding for living collections is a continuing challenge and threatens to create a two-tier system where medically relevant collections are well funded and all other collections are underfunded and hence understaffed. Molecular, genetic, and whole genome sequence analysis of contents of microbes and other living resource collections bring additional value to living collections.
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.