Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32072921›Full record

ArticleeLife2020

How new genes are born.

Urminder Singh, Eve Syrkin Wurtele

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Detecting anomalous proteins using deep representations.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Editorial: Carbon allocation, volume II.Frontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. orfipy: a fast and flexible tool for extracting ORFs.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2021
    Article
  14. pyrpipe: a Python package for RNA-Seq workflows.NAR genomics and bioinformatics · 2021
    Article
  15. Article
  16. New Genes Born-In or Invading Vertebrate Genomes.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Urminder SinghDepartment of Genetics, Developmental and Cell Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3703-0820
Eve Syrkin WurteleDepartment of Genetics, Developmental and Cell Biology, Iowa State University, Ames, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1552-9495

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analysis of yeast, fly and human genomes suggests that sequence divergence is not the main source of orphan genes.

Indexed as

Saccharomyces cerevisiaeHumansSyntenycomputational biologyconserved syntenyde novo gene emergenceD. melanogasterevolutionevolutionary biologygenetic noveltyhumanorphan genesS. cerevisiaesequence divergencesystems biology

Identifiers

PMID32072921
PMCPMC7030788

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.