The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Bacterial phylogeny based on comparative sequence analysis (review)
Abstract
Comparative sequence analysis of small subunit rRNA is currently one of the most important methods for the elucidation of bacterial phylogeny as well as bacterial identification. Phylogenetic investigations targeting alternative phylogenetic markers such as large subunit rRNA, elongation factors, and ATPases have shown that 16S rRNA‐based trees reflect the history of the corresponding organisms globally. However, in comparison with three to four billion years of evolution the phylogenetic information content of these markers is limited. Consequently, the limited resolution power of the marker molecules allows only a spot check of the evolutionary history of microorganisms. This is often indicated by locally different topologies of trees based on different markers, data sets or the application of different treeing approaches. Sequence peculiarities as well as methods and parameters for data analysis were studied with respect to their effects on the results of phylogenetic investigations. It is shown that only careful data analysis starting with a proper alignment, followed by the analysis of positional variability, rates and character of change, testing various data selections, applying alternative treeing methods and, finally, performing confidence tests, allows reasonable utilization of the limited phylogenetic information.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Evolution of Protein Molecules
JUKES, T. H., & CANTOR, C. R. (1969) · Mammalian Protein Metabolism · doi:10.1016/b978-1-4832-3211-9.50009-7 · Cited by 11,032
Cited by
The Uncultured Microbial Majority
Rappé, M. S., & Giovannoni, S. J. (2003) · Annual Review of Microbiology · doi:10.1146/annurev.micro.57.030502.090759 · Cited by 2,017
SAR11 clade dominates ocean surface bacterioplankton communities
Morris, R. M., Rappé, M. S., Connon, S. A., Vergin, K. L., Siebold, W. A., Carlson, C. A., & Giovannoni, S. J. (2002) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature01240 · Cited by 1,129
Prokaryotic Evolution in Light of Gene Transfer
Gogarten, J. P., Doolittle, W. F., & Lawrence, J. G. (2002) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.molbev.a004046 · Cited by 986
Hold, G. L., Schwiertz, A., Aminov, R. I., Blaut, M., & Flint, H. J. (2003) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.69.7.4320-4324.2003 · Cited by 350
Genome trees constructed using five different approaches suggest new major bacterial clades
Wolf, Y. I., Rogozin, I. B., Grishin, N. V., Tatusov, R. L., & Koonin, E. V. (2001) · BMC Evolutionary Biology · doi:10.1186/1471-2148-1-8 · Cited by 304
Metadata
- Authors
- Ludwig, W., Strunk, O., Klugbauer, S., Klugbauer, N., Weizenegger, M., Neumaier, J., Bachleitner, M., & Schleifer, K. H.
- Venue
- ELECTROPHORESIS
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1998-04
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 554-568
- ISSN
- 0173-0835 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2683
- OpenAlex
- W2030729461
- Cited by
- 739
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 10.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Bacterial phylogeny based on comparative sequence analysis (review). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/elps.1150190416
- The paper
- Ludwig, W., Strunk, O., Klugbauer, S., Klugbauer, N., Weizenegger, M., Neumaier, J., Bachleitner, M., & Schleifer, K. H. (1998). Bacterial phylogeny based on comparative sequence analysis (review). ELECTROPHORESIS. https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.1150190416
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.