Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33575581›Full record

ArticleNAR genomics and bioinformatics2020

A minimum reporting standard for multiple sequence alignments.

Thomas K F Wong, Subha Kalyaanamoorthy, Karen Meusemann, David K Yeates, Bernhard Misof, Lars S Jermiin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NAR genomics and bioinformatics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing 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

33 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Evolutionary dynamics of the arthropod molting machinery.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Mammalian evolution and human mutation burden in Rab GTPases.Biochemistry and biophysics reports · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. PASS2: update of database of structure-based sequence alignments.Database : the journal of biological databases and curation · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Day-night gene expression reveals circadian geneProceedings. Biological sciences · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  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

6 authors.

Thomas K F WongLand & Water, CSIRO, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Subha KalyaanamoorthyLand & Water, CSIRO, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Karen MeusemannAustralian National Insect Collection, CSIRO National Research Collections Australia, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
David K YeatesAustralian National Insect Collection, CSIRO National Research Collections Australia, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Bernhard MisofZoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, 53113 Bonn, Germany.
Lars S JermiinLand & Water, CSIRO, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple sequence alignments (MSAs) play a pivotal role in studies of molecular sequence data, but nobody has developed a minimum reporting standard (MRS) to quantify the completeness of MSAs in terms of completely specified nucleotides or amino acids. We present an MRS that relies on four simple completeness metrics. The metrics are implemented in AliStat, a program developed to support the MRS. A survey of published MSAs illustrates the benefits and unprecedented transparency offered by the MRS.

Identifiers

PMID33575581
PMCPMC7671350

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.