ArticlePloS one2021
From e-voucher to genomic data: Preserving archive specimens as demonstrated with medically important mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae) and kissing bugs (Hemiptera: Reduviidae).
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pathogen prospecting of museums: Reconstructing malaria epidemiology.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024Article
- Phylogenomics reveals the history of host use in mosquitoes.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Nondestructive Methods of Pathogen Detection: Importance of Mosquito Integrity in Studies of Disease Transmission and Control.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Article
- A Minimally Morphologically Destructive Approach for DNA Retrieval and Whole-Genome Shotgun Sequencing of Pinned Historic Dipteran Vector Species.Genome biology and evolution · 2021Article
- Detection of the Japanese encephalitis vector mosquito Culex tritaeniorhynchus in Australia using molecular diagnostics and morphology.Parasites & vectors · 2021Article
- Designation of the neotype ofZooKeys · 2021Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Scientific collections such as the U.S. National Museum (USNM) are critical to filling knowledge gaps in molecular systematics studies. The global taxonomic impediment has resulted in a reduction of expert taxonomists generating new collections of rare or understudied taxa and these large historic collections may be the only reliable source of material for some taxa. Integrated systematics studies using both morphological examinations and DNA sequencing are often required for resolving many taxonomic issues but as DNA methods often require partial or complete destruction of a sample, there are many factors to consider before implementing destructive sampling of specimens within scientific collections. We present a methodology for the use of archive specimens that includes two crucial phases: 1) thoroughly documenting specimens destined for destructive sampling-a process called electronic vouchering, and 2) the pipeline used for whole genome sequencing of archived specimens, from extraction of genomic DNA to assembly of putative genomes with basic annotation. The process is presented for eleven specimens from two different insect subfamilies of medical importance to humans: Anophelinae (Diptera: Culicidae)-mosquitoes and Triatominae (Hemiptera: Reduviidae)-kissing bugs. Assembly of whole mitochondrial genome sequences of all 11 specimens along with the results of an ortholog search and BLAST against the NCBI nucleotide database are also presented.
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.