Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35300489›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2022

Comparative Genome Analysis of '

Ching-Ting Huang, Shu-Ting Cho, Yu-Chen Lin, Choon-Meng Tan, Yi-Ching Chiu, Jun-Yi Yang, Chih-Horng Kuo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Draft genome sequence of "Microbiology resource announcements · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 'Insects · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Complete genome sequence of "Frontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  20. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ching-Ting HuangInstitute of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
Shu-Ting ChoInstitute of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yu-Chen LinInstitute of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
Choon-Meng TanInstitute of Biochemistry, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Yi-Ching ChiuInstitute of Biochemistry, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Jun-Yi YangInstitute of Biochemistry, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Chih-Horng KuoInstitute of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
Institute of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica · TWNational Chung Hsing University · TWAcademia Sinica · TW

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Phytoplasmas are insect-transmitted plant pathogens that cause substantial losses in agriculture. In addition to economic impact, phytoplasmas induce distinct disease symptoms in infected plants, thus attracting attention for research on molecular plant-microbe interactions and plant developmental processes. Due to the difficulty of establishing an axenic culture of these bacteria, culture-independent genome characterization is a crucial tool for phytoplasma research. However, phytoplasma genomes have strong nucleotide composition biases and are repetitive, which make it challenging to produce complete assemblies. In this study, we utilized Illumina and Oxford Nanopore sequencing technologies to obtain the complete genome sequence of '

Indexed as

effectorgenomicsmobile genetic elementmolecular evolutionphytoplasmaplant pathogen

Identifiers

PMID35300489
PMCPMC8923039
OpenAlexW4214525701

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.