ArticleBiology direct2023
Did the early full genome sequencing of yeast boost gene function discovery?
Article in Biology direct, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcription Regulatory ProteinmicroPublication biology · 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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAlthough the genome of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (S. cerevisiae) was the first one of a eukaryote organism that was fully sequenced (in 1996), a complete understanding of the potential of encoded biomolecular mechanisms has not yet been achieved. Here, we wish to quantify how far the goal of a full list of S. cerevisiae gene functions still is.
resultsThe scientific literature about S. cerevisiae protein-coding genes has been mapped onto the yeast genome via the mentioning of names for genomic regions in scientific publications. The match was quantified with the ratio of a given gene name's occurrences to those of any gene names in the article. We find that ~ 230 elite genes with ≥ 75 full publication equivalents (FPEs, FPE = 1 is an idealized publication referring to just a single gene) command ~ 45% of all literature. At the same time, about two thirds of the genes (each with less than 10 FPEs) are described in just 12% of the literature (in average each such gene has just ~ 1.5% of the literature of an elite gene). About 600 genes have not been mentioned in any dedicated article. Compared with other groups of genes, the literature growth rates were highest for uncharacterized or understudied genes until late nineties of the twentieth century. Yet, these growth rates deteriorated and became negative thereafter. Thus, yeast function discovery for previously uncharacterized genes has returned to the level of ~ 1980. At the same time, literature for anyhow well-studied genes (with a threshold T10 (≥ 10 FPEs) and higher) remains steadily growing.
conclusionsDid the early full genome sequencing of yeast boost gene function discovery? The data proves that the moment of publishing the full genome in reality coincides with the onset of decline of gene function discovery for previously uncharacterized genes. If the current status of literature about yeast molecular mechanisms can be extrapolated into the future, it will take about another ~ 50 years to complete the yeast gene function list. We found that a small group of scientific journals contributed extraordinarily to publishing early reports relevant to yeast gene function discoveries.
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.