ArticleBioinformatics (Oxford, England)2017
Xenolog classification.
Article in Bioinformatics (Oxford, England), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 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
39 citing papers in PubMed.
- Annotating the pangenome reveals the diversity in the genetic basis for metabolic enzymes.Science advances · 2026Article
- Milk Lipids as Bioactive Modulators of the Bacterial Proteome: Mechanisms Linking Dairy Management to Microbial Performance.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- Quest for Orthologs in the era of Data Deluge and AI: Challenges and Innovations in Orthology Prediction and Data Integration.Journal of molecular evolution · 2025Review
- Human xenobiotic metabolism proteins have full-length and split homologs in the gut microbiome.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025Article
- Feature Architecture-Aware Ortholog Search With fDOG Reveals the Distribution of Plant Cell Wall-Degrading Enzymes Across Life.Molecular biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Genomics Sheds New Light on the Ancestral Bilaterian Opsin Repertoire and Suggests Rhabdomeric Phototransduction in Xenacoelomorpha.Genome biology and evolution · 2025Article
- Convergent reduction of immune receptor repertoires during plant adaptation to diverse special lifestyles and habitats.Nature plants · 2025Article
- Characterization, Evolution, Expression and Functional Divergence of theInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- The somatic genome of Eptatretus okinoseanus reveals the adaptation to deep-sea oligotrophic environment.BMC genomics · 2024Article
- Extreme overall mushroom genome expansion in Mycena s.s. irrespective of plant hosts or substrate specializations.Cell genomics · 2024Article
- Snowball: a novel gene family required for developmental patterning of fruiting bodies of mushroom-forming fungi (Agaricomycetes).mSystems · 2024Article
- tRNA gene content, structure, and organization in the flowering plant lineage.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- The Theory of Gene Family Histories.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2024Article
- Relative timing information and orthology in evolutionary scenarios.Algorithms for molecular biology : AMB · 2023Article
- Genomes of fungi and relatives reveal delayed loss of ancestral gene families and evolution of key fungal traits.Nature ecology & evolution · 2023Article
- AvP: A software package for automatic phylogenetic detection of candidate horizontal gene transfers.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
- Spodoptera littoralis genome mining brings insights on the dynamic of expansion of gustatory receptors in polyphagous noctuidae.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2022Article
- A comparative genomic analysis of lichen-forming fungi reveals new insights into fungal lifestyles.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Article
- A Large-Scale Genome-Based Survey of Acidophilic Bacteria Suggests That Genome Streamlining Is an Adaption for Life at Low pH.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivation: Orthology analysis is a fundamental tool in comparative genomics. Sophisticated methods have been developed to distinguish between orthologs and paralogs and to classify paralogs into subtypes depending on the duplication mechanism and timing, relative to speciation. However, no comparable framework exists for xenologs: gene pairs whose history, since their divergence, includes a horizontal transfer. Further, the diversity of gene pairs that meet this broad definition calls for classification of xenologs with similar properties into subtypes. Results: We present a xenolog classification that uses phylogenetic reconciliation to assign each pair of genes to a class based on the event responsible for their divergence and the historical association between genes and species. Our classes distinguish between genes related through transfer alone and genes related through duplication and transfer. Further, they separate closely-related genes in distantly-related species from distantly-related genes in closely-related species. We present formal rules that assign gene pairs to specific xenolog classes, given a reconciled gene tree with an arbitrary number of duplications and transfers. These xenology classification rules have been implemented in software and tested on a collection of ∼13 000 prokaryotic gene families. In addition, we present a case study demonstrating the connection between xenolog classification and gene function prediction. Availability and Implementation: The xenolog classification rules have been implemented in N otung 2.9, a freely available phylogenetic reconciliation software package. http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~durand/Notung . Gene trees are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.7488/ds/1503 . Contact: durand@cmu.edu. Supplementary information: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.
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.