Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29029851›Full record

ReviewTrends in genetics : TIG2017

Arresting Evolution.

James J Bull, Jeffrey E Barrick

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in genetics : TIG, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. The future of self-selecting and stable fermentations.Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology · 2020
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Chromatin Structure and Drug Resistance inJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020
    Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Synthetic addiction extends the productive life time of engineeredProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  19. Article
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.

James J BullDepartment of Integrative Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Center for Systems and Synthetic Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Both authors contributed equally.
Jeffrey E BarrickDepartment of Molecular Biosciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Center for Systems and Synthetic Biology, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712, USA; Both authors contributed equally. Electronic address: jbarrick@cm.utexas.edu.

Funding

The biophysical basis of translational selectionR01GM088344 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI BARRICK, JEFFREY EVAN, WILKE, CLAUS O · 2009 to 2023
$3.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM088344
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evolution in the form of selective breeding has long been harnessed as a useful tool by humans. However, rapid evolution can also be a danger to our health and a stumbling block for biotechnology. Unwanted evolution can underlie the emergence of drug and pesticide resistance, cancer, and weeds. It makes live vaccines and engineered cells inherently unreliable and unpredictable, and therefore potentially unsafe. Yet, there are strategies that have been and can possibly be used to stop or slow many types of evolution. We review and classify existing population genetics-inspired methods for arresting evolution. Then, we discuss how genome editing techniques enable a radically new set of approaches to limit evolution.

Indexed as

Biological EvolutionAnimalsBiotechnologyBreedingCrops, AgriculturalGene EditingGenetic EngineeringHumansdrug resistanceevolution proofgene drivegenome engineeringrefuge cropsynthetic biology

Identifiers

PMID29029851
PMCPMC5777322

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.