Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32138290›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2020

Evaluation of Seven Different RNA-Seq Alignment Tools Based on Experimental Data from the Model Plant

Stephanie Schaarschmidt, Axel Fischer, Ellen Zuther, Dirk K Hincha

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Bovine Endometrium Drives and Responds to Divergence of In Vitro Produced Conceptus Biochemistry.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephanie SchaarschmidtMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam, Germany.
Axel FischerMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam, Germany.
Ellen ZutherMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam, Germany.
Dirk K HinchaMax Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology, Am Mühlenberg 1, 14476 Potsdam, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6887-4933
Max Planck Institute of Molecular Plant Physiology · DE

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft CRC973
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantification of gene expression is crucial to connect genome sequences with phenotypic and physiological data. RNA-Sequencing (RNA-Seq) has taken a prominent role in the study of transcriptomic reactions of plants to various environmental and genetic perturbations. However, comparative tests of different tools for RNA-Seq read mapping and quantification have been mainly performed on data from animals or humans, which necessarily neglect, for example, the large genetic variability among natural accessions within plant species. Here, we compared seven computational tools for their ability to map and quantify Illumina single-end reads from the

Indexed as

ArabidopsisArabidopsis ProteinsGene Expression ProfilingRNA-SeqSequence Analysis, RNASoftwareArabidopsis ProteinsArabidopsis thalianadifferential gene expressionnatural genetic variationread mapping toolsRNA-Seq

Identifiers

PMID32138290
PMCPMC7084517
OpenAlexW3010410008

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.