Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28761007›Full record

ReviewJournal of genetics2017

Complexity: the organizing principle at the interface of biological (dis)order.

Ramray Bhat, Dharma Pally

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of genetics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
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.

Ramray BhatDepartment of Molecular Reproduction Development and Genetics, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru 560 012, India. ramray@mrdg.iisc.ernet.in.
Dharma Pally

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The term complexity means several things to biologists.When qualifying morphological phenotype, on the one hand, it is used to signify the sheer complicatedness of living systems, especially as a result of the multicomponent aspect of biological form. On the other hand, it has been used to represent the intricate nature of the connections between constituents that make up form: a more process-based explanation. In the context of evolutionary arguments, complexity has been defined, in a quantifiable fashion, as the amount of information, an informatic template such as a sequence of nucleotides or amino acids stores about its environment. In this perspective, we begin with a brief review of the history of complexity theory. We then introduce a developmental and an evolutionary understanding of what it means for biological systems to be complex.We propose that the complexity of living systems can be understood through two interdependent structural properties: multiscalarity of interconstituent mechanisms and excitability of the biological materials. The answer to whether a system becomes more or less complex over time depends on the potential for its constituents to interact in novel ways and combinations to give rise to new structures and functions, as well as on the evolution of excitable properties that would facilitate the exploration of interconstituent organization in the context of their microenvironments and macroenvironments.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionEcosystemEnvironmentModels, TheoreticalAnimalsCyberneticsGenotypeHumansPhenotypeTime Factors

Identifiers

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.