The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pseudogene.org: a comprehensive database and comparison platform for pseudogene annotation
Open accessAbstract
The Pseudogene.org knowledgebase serves as a comprehensive repository for pseudogene annotation. The definition of a pseudogene varies within the literature, resulting in significantly different approaches to the problem of identification. Consequently, it is difficult to maintain a consistent collection of pseudogenes in detail necessary for their effective use. Our database is designed to address this issue. It integrates a variety of heterogeneous resources and supports a subset structure that highlights specific groups of pseudogenes that are of interest to the research community. Tools are provided for the comparison of sets and the creation of layered set unions, enabling researchers to derive a current 'consensus' set of pseudogenes. Additional features include versatile search, the capacity for robust interaction with other databases, the ability to reconstruct older versions of the database (accounting for changing genome builds) and an underlying object-oriented interface designed for researchers with a minimal knowledge of programming. At the present time, the database contains more than 100,000 pseudogenes spanning 64 prokaryote and 11 eukaryote genomes, including a collection of human annotations compiled from 16 sources.
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
Gene Losses during Human Origins
Wang, X., Grus, W. E., & Zhang, J. (2006) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0040052 · Cited by 246
Cited by
NCBI Reference Sequences (RefSeq): current status, new features and genome annotation policy
Pruitt, K. D., Tatusova, T., Brown, G. R., & Maglott, D. R. (2012) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkr1079 · Cited by 1,149
Battle, A., Mostafavi, S., Zhu, X., Potash, J. B., Weissman, M. M., McCormick, C., Haudenschild, C. D., Beckman, K. B., Shi, J., Mei, R., et al. (2014) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.155192.113 · Cited by 547
A beginner’s guide to eukaryotic genome annotation
Yandell, M., & Ence, D. (2012) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3174 · Cited by 588
Annotating non-coding regions of the genome.
Alexander, R. P., Fang, G., Rozowsky, J., Snyder, M., & Gerstein, M. B. (2010) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg2814 · Cited by 464
Self-citationThe Road to Metagenomics: From Microbiology to DNA Sequencing Technologies and Bioinformatics
Escobar-Zepeda, A., Vera-Ponce de León, A., & Sanchez-Flores, A. (2015) · Frontiers in Genetics · doi:10.3389/fgene.2015.00348 · Cited by 363
Metadata
- Authors
- Karro, J. E., Yan, Y., Zheng, D., Zhang, Z., Carriero, N., Cayting, P., Harrrison, P., & Gerstein, M.
- Venue
- Nucleic Acids Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-11-11
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- suppl_1
- Pages
- D55-D60
- ISSN
- 0305-1048 (ISSN-L)
- 1362-4962
- OpenAlex
- W2144882930
- Cited by
- 187
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 3.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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: Pseudogene.org: a comprehensive database and comparison platform for pseudogene annotation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/nar/gkl851
- The paper
- Karro, J. E., Yan, Y., Zheng, D., Zhang, Z., Carriero, N., Cayting, P., Harrrison, P., & Gerstein, M. (2007). Pseudogene.org: a comprehensive database and comparison platform for pseudogene annotation. Nucleic Acids Research. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl851
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.