Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34828375›Full record

ReviewGenes2021

Regeneration in the Segmented Annelid

Elaine C Seaver, Danielle M de Jong

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Genes, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. DNA methylation in invertebrate genomes and cell lineage plasticity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Annelids as models of germ cell and gonad regeneration.Journal of experimental zoology. Part B, Molecular and developmental evolution · 2024
    Review
  10. Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. The sea spiderProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    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

2 authors.

Elaine C SeaverWhitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience, University of Florida, Saint Augustine, FL 32080, USA.
Danielle M de JongWhitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience, University of Florida, Saint Augustine, FL 32080, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The segmented worms, or annelids, are a clade within the Lophotrochozoa, one of the three bilaterian superclades. Annelids have long been models for regeneration studies due to their impressive regenerative abilities. Furthermore, the group exhibits variation in adult regeneration abilities with some species able to replace anterior segments, posterior segments, both or neither. Successful regeneration includes regrowth of complex organ systems, including the centralized nervous system, gut, musculature, nephridia and gonads. Here, regenerative capabilities of the annelid

Indexed as

RegenerationAnimalsEmbryonic DevelopmentEmbryo, NonmammalianGenomicsPolychaetaWhole Genome SequencingannelidCapitella teletagermlineHox genesmultipotent progenitor cellsregeneration

Identifiers

PMID34828375
PMCPMC8623021

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.