ArticleScientific reports2022
Taxonomic assessment of two wild house mouse subspecies using whole-genome sequencing.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Molecular phylogeny and morphometric divergence of native Korean wild mice (Mus musculus).Laboratory animal research · 2026Article
- Predicting functional constraints across evolutionary timescales with phylogeny-informed genomic language models.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Phenogenomic resources immortalized in a panel of wild-derived strains of five species of house mice.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The house mouse species complex (Mus musculus) is comprised of three primary subspecies. A large number of secondary subspecies have also been suggested on the basis of divergent morphology and molecular variation at limited numbers of markers. While the phylogenetic relationships among the primary M. musculus subspecies are well-defined, relationships among secondary subspecies and between secondary and primary subspecies remain less clear. Here, we integrate de novo genome sequencing of museum-stored specimens of house mice from one secondary subspecies (M. m. bactrianus) and publicly available genome sequences of house mice previously characterized as M. m. helgolandicus, with whole genome sequences from diverse representatives of the three primary house mouse subspecies. We show that mice assigned to the secondary M. m. bactrianus and M. m. helgolandicus subspecies are not genetically differentiated from M. m. castaneus and M. m. domesticus, respectively. Overall, our work suggests that the M. m. bactrianus and M. m. helgolandicus subspecies are not well-justified taxonomic entities, emphasizing the importance of leveraging whole-genome sequence data to inform subspecies designations. Additionally, our investigation provides tailored experimental procedures for generating whole genome sequences from air-dried mouse skins, along with key genomic resources to inform future genomic studies of wild mouse diversity.
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.