Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37198475›Full record

ArticleNature2023

Ancient gene linkages support ctenophores as sister to other animals.

Darrin T Schultz, Steven H D Haddock, Jessen V Bredeson, Richard E Green, Oleg Simakov, Daniel S Rokhsar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 194 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
194citing 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

194 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Genomic Distortion of Jawed Vertebrate Phylogeny.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Sequence and structural alignments reveal insights into ANKLE2 evolution and function.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2026
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

134 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Darrin T SchultzDepartment of Neuroscience and Developmental Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. darrin.schultz@univie.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0003-1190-1122
Steven H D HaddockMonterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, Moss Landing, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9420-4482
Jessen V BredesonDepartment of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5489-8512
Richard E GreenDepartment of Biomolecular Engineering and Bioinformatics, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-0516-5827
Oleg SimakovDepartment of Neuroscience and Developmental Biology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria. oleg.simakov@univie.ac.at.ORCID 0000-0002-3585-4511
Daniel S RokhsarDepartment of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA. DSRokhsar@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-8704-2224

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A central question in evolutionary biology is whether sponges or ctenophores (comb jellies) are the sister group to all other animals. These alternative phylogenetic hypotheses imply different scenarios for the evolution of complex neural systems and other animal-specific traits

Indexed as

CtenophoraPhylogenyAnimalsGenomePoriferaSynteny

Identifiers

PMID37198475
PMCPMC10232365

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.