Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32123395›Full record

ReviewNature methods2020

Visualizing the genome in high resolution challenges our textbook understanding.

Melike Lakadamyali, Maria Pia Cosma

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature methods, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing 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

60 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Quantitative spatial analysis of chromatin biomolecular condensates using cryoelectron tomography.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

2 authors.

Melike LakadamyaliDepartment of Physiology, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. melikel@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7524-6414
Maria Pia CosmaCentre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Barcelona, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The relationship between the 4D folding of the genome and its function is an outstanding question in biology. A range of methods that probe the folding of the genome in space and time with unprecedented resolution have been developed. These methods, including chromosome conformation capture and high-resolution light and electron microscopy, are shedding new light on genome architecture and function. Here, we review the emerging picture of genome organization revealed by super-resolution and live-cell imaging. We compare and contrast population-based chromosome conformation capture approaches and imaging-based approaches and highlight future challenges.

Indexed as

GenomeChromosome PaintingDNAHumansMicroscopy, ElectronMicroscopy, FluorescenceNucleic Acid ConformationDNA

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.