ArticleVirus genes2019
Misinterpretation of Schmallenberg virus sequence variations: the sample material makes the difference.
Article in Virus genes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Bunyamwera orthobunyavirus Gc glycoprotein head and stalk drives an infectious virion assembly pathway specific for the insect host.PLoS pathogens · 2026Article
- Schmallenberg virus non-structural proteins NSs and NSm are not essential for experimental infection ofJournal of virology · 2025Article
- Assessing Schmallenberg Virus Disease in Sardinia (Italy) After the First Epidemic Episode in 2012.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- High genetic variability of Schmallenberg virus M-segment leads to efficient immune escape from neutralizing antibodies.PLoS pathogens · 2021Article
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
In recent reports about the molecular epidemiology of Schmallenberg virus (SBV), an orthobunyavirus affecting ruminants, it was proposed that the observed sequence variability within the viral M-segment might be higher in sheep than in cattle. However, these analyses are highly biased by the sample material from which the publicly available sequences were generated. While from cattle predominantly blood samples from acutely infected animals were studied, the vast majority of ovine samples originate from malformed fetuses or newborn lambs. Therefore, the observed sequence variability is misinterpreted since the samples from malformed fetuses and lambs do not reflect circulating SBV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30600431What 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.