Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32584752›Full record

ArticleMicrobial genomics2020

Andrew J Page, Emma V Ainsworth, Gemma C Langridge

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial genomics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Genomic diversity of non-typhoidalMicrobial genomics · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Microbial genomics · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Structural genome variants ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023
    Article
  14. Impact ofEvolution letters · 2022
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrew J PageMicrobes in the Food Chain, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UQ, UK.
Emma V AinsworthMicrobes in the Food Chain, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UQ, UK.
Gemma C LangridgeMicrobes in the Food Chain, Quadram Institute Bioscience, Norwich Research Park, Norwich, NR4 7UQ, UK.
Norwich Research Park · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/CCG1860/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R012504/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BBS/E/F/000PR10352
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rearrangements of large genome fragments occur in bacteria between repeat sequences and can impact on growth and gene expression. Homologous recombination resulting in inversion between indirect repeats and excision/translocation between direct repeats enables these structural changes. One form of rearrangement occurs around ribosomal operons, found in multiple copies across many bacteria, but identification of these rearrangements by sequencing requires reads of several thousand bases to span the ribosomal operons. With long-read sequencing aiding the routine generation of complete bacterial assemblies, we have developed

Indexed as

OperonBacteriaBacterial ProteinsGene OrderHeat-Shock ProteinsPeptide FragmentsRibosomal ProteinsSequence Analysis, DNASoftwareBacterial ProteinsHeat-Shock ProteinsPeptide FragmentsRibosomal ProteinsSNP nonapeptidebacteriagenome structurerearrangementsequencing

Identifiers

PMID32584752
PMCPMC7478630
OpenAlexW3037733113

What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.