Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33926534›Full record

ReviewGenome biology2021

Next-generation microbiology: from comparative genomics to gene function.

Carolin M Kobras, Andrew K Fenton, Samuel K Sheppard

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genome biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing 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

39 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Methicillin-sensitiveMicrobial genomics · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. The Use of Next-Generation Sequencing in Personalized Medicine.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Review
  17. Review
  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

3 authors.

Carolin M KobrasDepartment of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, The Florey Institute for Host-Pathogen Interactions, Sheffield, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4393-5829
Andrew K FentonDepartment of Molecular Biology & Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, The Florey Institute for Host-Pathogen Interactions, Sheffield, UK. A.K.Fenton@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4042-4580
Samuel K SheppardDepartment of Biology & Biochemistry, University of Bath, Milner Centre for Evolution, Bath, UK. S.K.Sheppard@bath.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-6901-3203

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L015080/1Medical Research Council MR/M501608/1Medical Research Council MR/S009280/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbiology is at a turning point in its 120-year history. Widespread next-generation sequencing has revealed genetic complexity among bacteria that could hardly have been imagined by pioneers such as Pasteur, Escherich and Koch. This data cascade brings enormous potential to improve our understanding of individual bacterial cells and the genetic basis of phenotype variation. However, this revolution in data science cannot replace established microbiology practices, presenting the challenge of how to integrate these new techniques. Contrasting comparative and functional genomic approaches, we evoke molecular microbiology theory and established practice to present a conceptual framework and practical roadmap for next-generation microbiology.

Indexed as

Gene Expression RegulationGenomicsBacteriaDNA Transposable ElementsGenetic Association StudiesGenetic FitnessGenetic VariationGenome-Wide Association StudyMetagenomeMetagenomicsMicrobiological TechniquesMicrobiologyMutagenesis, InsertionalDNA Transposable Elements

Identifiers

PMID33926534
PMCPMC8082670

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.