ArticleCurrent biology : CB2016
Microbial Evolution: Xenology (Apparently) Trumps Paralogy.
Article in Current biology : CB, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Annotating the pangenome reveals the diversity in the genetic basis for metabolic enzymes.Science advances · 2026Article
- How can microbial population genomics inform community ecology?Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Review
- Article
- Deciphering the unexplored Leptospira diversity from soils uncovers genomic evolution to virulence.Microbial genomics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Within-genome gene duplication is generally considered the source of extra copies when higher dosage is required and a starting point for evolution of new function. A new study suggests that horizontal gene transfer can appear to play both roles.
Identifiers
27875695What 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.