ArticlePloS one2017
High precision detection of conserved segments from synteny blocks.
Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Chromosome-level Streptochaeta genome elucidates the ancestral karyotype and allopolyploid origin of grasses.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Comparative genomics and biomineralization potential of a native ureolytic Bacillus sp. N₉ for microbially induced calcite precipitation.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Article
- PhylteR: Efficient Identification of Outlier Sequences in Phylogenomic Datasets.Molecular biology and evolution · 2023Article
- Evaluating impacts of syntenic block detection strategies on rearrangement phylogeny using Mycobacterium tuberculosis isolates.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2023Article
- Genomicus 2018: karyotype evolutionary trees and on-the-fly synteny computing.Nucleic acids research · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A conserved segment, i.e. a segment of chromosome unbroken during evolution, is an important operational concept in comparative genomics. Until now, algorithms that are designed to identify conserved segments often return synteny blocks that overlap, synteny blocks that include micro-rearrangements or synteny blocks erroneously short. Here we present definitions of conserved segments and synteny blocks independent of any heuristic method and we describe four new post-processing strategies to refine synteny blocks into accurate conserved segments. The first strategy identifies micro-rearrangements, the second strategy identifies mono-genic conserved segments, the third returns non-overlapping segments and the fourth repairs incorrect ruptures of synteny. All these refinements are implemented in a new version of PhylDiag that has been benchmarked against i-ADHoRe 3.0 and Cyntenator, based on a realistic simulated evolution and true simulated conserved segments.
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.