Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33845764›Full record

ArticleBMC genomics2021

Long-term TE persistence even without beneficial insertion.

Stefan C Kremer, Stefan Linquist, Brent Saylor, Tyler A Elliott, T Ryan Gregory, Karl Cottenie

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC genomics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Transposon Ecology and the Octopus Genome.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2026
    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

6 authors.

Stefan C KremerSchool of Computer Science, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada. skremer@uoguelph.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3667-4379
Stefan LinquistDepartment of Philosophy, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Brent SaylorDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Tyler A ElliottCentre for Biodiversity Genomics, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
T Ryan GregoryDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Karl CottenieDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.

Funding

National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada n/aSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada n/a
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This correspondence responds to the critique by Butler et al. (BMC Genomics 22:241, 2021) of our recent paper on transposable element (TE) persistence. We address the three main objections raised by Butler et al. After running a series of additional simulations that were inspired by the authors' criticisms, we are able to present a more nuanced understanding of the conditions that generate long-term persistence.

Indexed as

DNA Transposable ElementsDNA Transposable Elements

Identifiers

PMID33845764
PMCPMC8042931

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.