Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38472431›Full record

ReviewNature ecology & evolution2024

Preservation of proteins in the geosphere.

Raman Umamaheswaran, Suryendu Dutta

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature ecology & evolution, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Raman UmamaheswaranDepartment of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India. raman.u@sci.hokudai.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2731-8214
Suryendu DuttaDepartment of Earth Sciences, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India. s.dutta@iitb.ac.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2969-116X

Funding

Department of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology (DST) DST/SJF/E&ASA01/2016-17
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Deep-time protein preservation has attracted increasing interest and rapid research activity within the palaeobiological community in recent years, but there are several different viewpoints without a cohesive framework for the interpretation of these proteins. Therefore, despite this activity, crucial gaps exist in the understanding of how proteins are preserved in the geological record and we believe it is vital to arrive at a synthesis of the various taphonomic pathways in order to proceed forward with their elucidation. Here we take a critical look at the state of knowledge regarding deep-time protein preservation and argue for the necessity of a more nuanced approach to understanding the molecular taphonomy of proteins through the lens of diagenetic pathways. We also propound an initial framework with which to comprehend the chemical changes undergone by proteins via the concept of 'proteagen'.

Indexed as

ProteinsFossilsPaleontologyProteins

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.