Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28465677›Full record

ReviewThe journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases2017

Strategies in 'snake venomics' aiming at an integrative view of compositional, functional, and immunological characteristics of venoms.

Bruno Lomonte, Juan J Calvete

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

76 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Frontiers in immunology · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Venomics of the Anchor Coral SnakeTropical medicine and infectious disease · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Toxins · 2025
    Article
  13. Physiological responses of the monocled cobra (The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Bruno LomonteInstituto Clodomiro Picado, Facultad de Microbiología, Universidad de Costa Rica, San José, 11501 Costa Rica.ORCID 0000-0003-2419-6469
Juan J CalveteStructural and Functional Venomics Laboratory, Instituto de Biomedicina de Valencia, CSIC, Valencia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This work offers a general overview on the evolving strategies for the proteomic analysis of snake venoms, and discusses how these may be combined through diverse experimental approaches with the goal of achieving a more comprehensive knowledge on the compositional, toxic, and immunological characteristics of venoms. Some recent developments in this field are summarized, highlighting how strategies have evolved from the mere cataloguing of venom components (proteomics/venomics), to a broader exploration of their immunological (antivenomics) and functional (toxicovenomics) characteristics. Altogether, the combination of these complementary strategies is helping to build a wider, more integrative view of the life-threatening protein cocktails produced by venomous snakes, responsible for thousands of deaths every year.

Indexed as

AntivenomicsProteomicsSnake venomsToxicovenomicsVenomics

Identifiers

PMID28465677
PMCPMC5408369

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.