Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28090383›Full record

ArticleMobile genetic elements2016

The future of transposable element annotation and their classification in the light of functional genomics - what we can learn from the fables of Jean de la Fontaine?

Peter Arensburger, Benoît Piégu, Yves Bigot

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in Mobile genetic elements, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Fourth Report on Chicken Genes and Chromosomes 2022.Cytogenetic and genome research · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The Transposon Registry.Mobile DNA · 2019
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Somatizing the transposons action.Mobile genetic elements · 2017
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Peter ArensburgerBiological Sciences Department, California State Polytechnic University , Pomona, CA, USA.
Benoît PiéguPhysiologie de la reproduction et des Comportements, UMR INRA-CNRS 7247, PRC , Nouzilly, France.
Yves BigotPhysiologie de la reproduction et des Comportements, UMR INRA-CNRS 7247, PRC , Nouzilly, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transposable element (TE) science has been significantly influenced by the pioneering ideas of David Finnegan near the end of the last century, as well as by the classification systems that were subsequently developed. Today, whole genome TE annotation is mostly done using tools that were developed to aid gene annotation rather than to specifically study TEs. We argue that further progress in the TE field is impeded both by current TE classification schemes and by a failure to recognize that TE biology is fundamentally different from that of multicellular organisms. Novel genome wide TE annotation methods are helping to redefine our understanding of TE sequence origins and evolution. We briefly discuss some of these new methods as well as ideas for possible alternative classification schemes. Our hope is to encourage the formation of a society to organize a larger debate on these questions and to promote the adoption of standards for annotation and an improved TE classification.

Indexed as

genomemobile genetic elementontologyrepeattaxonomy

Identifiers

PMID28090383
PMCPMC5160393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.