Evidence map›Paper›PMID 7780661›Full record

ArticleChromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology1995

Identification of highly conserved loci by genome painting.

T W Houseal, J A Cook, W S Modi, D W Hale

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology, 1995. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Comparative genome analysis in American marsupials: chromosome banding and in-situ hybridization.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 1999
    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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

T W HousealIntegrated Genetics, Framingham, MA 01701-9322, USA.
J A Cook
W S Modi
D W Hale
National Cancer Institute · USSequenom (United States) · USUniversity of Alaska Fairbanks · USYale University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fluorescence in situ hybridization was used to identify patterns of DNA similarity among the genomes of several rodent taxa. Total genomic or Cot-1 DNAs were used as hybridization probes against metaphase preparations across different taxonomic levels, including three species of Microtus (suborder Sciurognathi), three species of Microtus (suborder Sciurognathi), Mus musculus (suborder Sciurognathi) and Ctenomys steinbachi (suborder Hystricognathi). The hybridization patterns of Mus or Peromyscus (sciurognath) DNA to Mus metaphases, which were consistent with what is known of the satellite sequences in these species, demonstrated the efficacy of this approach for molecular cytogenetics and evolutionary biology. Additional hybridizations to chromosomes of Ctenomys or Microtus identified loci consisting of highly conserved DNA sequences. This approach has proved useful in investigating genome homologies across divergent rodent lineages. Chromosome microdissection can be used to characterize these regions further.

Indexed as

GenomeAnimalsArvicolinaeBiological EvolutionChromosomesDNA ProbesDNA, SatelliteIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMiceMuridaePeromyscusRepetitive Sequences, Nucleic AcidRodentiaDNA ProbesDNA, Satellite

Identifiers

PMID7780661
OpenAlexW2073966137

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.