Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30581450›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2018

Evaluation and Recommendations for Routine Genotyping Using Skim Whole Genome Re-sequencing in Canola.

M Michelle Malmberg, Denise M Barbulescu, Michelle C Drayton, Maiko Shinozuka, Preeti Thakur, Yvonne O Ogaji, German C Spangenberg, Hans D Daetwyler, Noel O I Cogan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Discovery and genome-guided mapping ofHorticulture research · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

9 authors.

M Michelle MalmbergAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Denise M BarbulescuAgriculture Victoria, Grains Innovation Park, Horsham, VIC, Australia.
Michelle C DraytonAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Maiko ShinozukaAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Preeti ThakurAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Yvonne O OgajiAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
German C SpangenbergAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Hans D DaetwylerAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.
Noel O I CoganAgriculture Victoria, AgriBio, Centre for AgriBioscience, Bundoora, VIC, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole genome sequencing offers genome wide, unbiased markers, and inexpensive library preparation. With the cost of sequencing decreasing rapidly, many plant genomes of modest size are amenable to skim whole genome resequencing (skim WGR). The use of skim WGR in diverse sample sets without the use of imputation was evaluated

Indexed as

Brassica napusdoubled haploidGBSlow coverageplant

Identifiers

PMID30581450
PMCPMC6292936

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.