ReviewTree physiology2025
Towards an official gene nomenclature for Populus trichocarpa.
Review in Tree physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genenames.org: the HGNC and PGNC resources in 2026.Nucleic acids research · 2026Article
- An updated sulfate transporter phylogeny uncovers a perennial-specific subgroup associated with lignification.Tree physiology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (www.genenames.org), which has been naming human genes for over 40 years, has been tasked with establishing an official gene nomenclature system for the black cottonwood tree Populus trichocarpa (Torr. & Gray). Here, we review the factors that must be considered when establishing gene nomenclature guidelines. What makes a good gene symbol, and what lessons can be learned from other nomenclature projects? Are there particular challenges associated with naming genes in poplar species? We look at the published gene symbols for Populus and highlight some issues, e.g., the same symbols being used for different genes, and diverse approaches to naming in gene families. What approaches can we take to resolving such conflicts? Since community adoption is key to the success of any nomenclature initiative, we have surveyed poplar researchers for feedback on draft guidelines and discussed some of the issues raised. Finally, we discuss the sustainability of such infrastructure projects-if we build it, will they come and who will fund the ongoing work?
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.