ArticlePLoS neglected tropical diseases2019
ParaDB: A manually curated database containing genomic annotation for the human pathogenic fungi Paracoccidioides spp.
Article in PLoS neglected tropical diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Challenges in Serologic Diagnostics of Neglected Human Systemic Mycoses: An Overview on Characterization of New Targets.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- One Century of Study: What We Learned aboutJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe genus Paracoccidioides consists of thermodymorphic fungi responsible for Paracoccidioidomycosis (PCM), a systemic mycosis that has been registered to affect ~10 million people in Latin America. Biogeographical data subdivided the genus Paracoccidioides in five divergent subgroups, which have been recently classified as different species. Genomic sequencing of five Paracoccidioides isolates, representing each of these subgroups/species provided an important framework for the development of post-genomic studies with these fungi. However, functional annotations of these genomes have not been submitted to manual curation and, as a result, ~60-90% of the Paracoccidioides protein-coding genes (depending on isolate/annotation) are currently described as responsible for hypothetical proteins, without any further functional/structural description. PRINCIPAL
findingsThe present work reviews the functional assignment of Paracoccidioides genes, reducing the number of hypothetical proteins to ~25-28%. These results were compiled in a relational database called ParaDB, dedicated to the main representatives of Paracoccidioides spp. ParaDB can be accessed through a friendly graphical interface, which offers search tools based on keywords or protein/DNA sequences. All data contained in ParaDB can be partially or completely downloaded through spreadsheet, multi-fasta and GFF3-formatted files, which can be subsequently used in a variety of downstream functional analyses. Moreover, the entire ParaDB environment has been configured in a Docker service, which has been submitted to the GitHub repository, ensuring long-term data availability to researchers. This service can be downloaded and used to perform fully functional local installations of the database in alternative computing ecosystems, allowing users to conduct their data mining and analyses in a personal and stable working environment.
conclusionsThese new annotations greatly reduce the number of genes identified solely as hypothetical proteins and are integrated into a dedicated database, providing resources to assist researchers in this field to conduct post-genomic studies with this group of human pathogenic fungi.
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.