Statistical Genomics Foundry
Paper
domain/synteny

Fitch 1976 (J Mol Evol 7:271) — definitional attribution check

0. Verdict up front

The citation does NOT resolve to a Fitch paper. There is no Fitch article anywhere in Journal of Molecular Evolution volume 7 (the 1975–76 volume). Page 271 of volume 7 falls inside a paper by Emile Zuckerkandl, not Fitch. So Fitch WM 1976, J Mol Evol 7:271 is a non-resolving / misattributed citation as written.

1. Citation

  • As cited (downstream skill): Fitch WM. 1976. J Mol Evol 7:271. Attributed as origin of the “synteny vs collinearity” distinction.
  • What actually occupies J Mol Evol 7:271:
    • Zuckerkandl E. “Evolutionary processes and evolutionary noise at the molecular level.” J Mol Evol 7:269–311 (1976). DOI 10.1007/BF01743626. (This is Part II; PubMed subtitle: “A selectionist model for random fixations in proteins”, PMID 180297. Part I, “Functional density in proteins,” is 7:167–183, DOI 10.1007/BF01731487, PMID 933174.) Page 271 lies within 269–311 → the Part II paper.

2. Access note

Verified against CrossRef metadata (journal ISSN 0022-2844, full volume-7 listing) and PubMed titles. I did not access full text of any volume-7 article (Springer paywall). Findings below rest on: (a) the complete CrossRef enumeration of J Mol Evol vol 7 works, and (b) PubMed article titles. Full-text contents of the Zuckerkandl paper were not read.

3. Thesis

n/a — no such Fitch source exists. The attribution check is the deliverable.

4. What the evidence shows

  • No Fitch paper in J Mol Evol vol 7. A CrossRef author scan of J Mol Evol 1974–1978 returns Fitch papers in vol 3 (161–177 Langley & Fitch; 263–278 Fitch & Farris; 279–291 Fitch), vol 5 (1–24 Fitch & Yasunobu), vol 8 (13–40), vol 10 (49–71; 97–102) — but none in vol 7. Page 271 is not Fitch.
  • Page 271 = Zuckerkandl, not Fitch. The only vol-7 article spanning page 271 is Zuckerkandl 7:269–311 (“Evolutionary processes and evolutionary noise at the molecular level” II). By title and PubMed subtitle it concerns protein evolutionary rates / functional density / random fixations in proteins — not genome synteny or gene collinearity.
  • Subject mismatch. Neither the Part I nor Part II Zuckerkandl paper is about chromosomal synteny or genomic collinearity; both are protein-sequence-evolution “noise/selection” papers.

5. Does it define “synteny” and/or “collinearity”?

ABSENT — not assessable in any Fitch-1976-J-Mol-Evol source because that source does not exist. The paper actually at 7:271 (Zuckerkandl) is subject-matter-unrelated to synteny/collinearity by its title and scope; no definition of either term is supported by the retrieved metadata. (Full text not read; but the terms are outside the paper’s stated topic.)

6. Commonly-credited origins (context — [summarizer-inferred] from guidance + general record)

The guidance notes, and the retrieval is consistent with, these alternative attributions:

  • “synteny” — commonly credited to Renwick 1971, Annu Rev Genet 5:81 (linkage/mapping sense).
  • Fitch’s canonical terminology paper is 1970, Syst Zool 19:99 — “Distinguishing homologous from analogous proteins” (origin of ortholog / paralog), NOT a synteny paper and NOT 1976. These are [summarizer-inferred] context, not verified from full text here. The retrieval contradicts the skill’s “Fitch 1976 J Mol Evol 7:271 = synteny/collinearity origin” attribution: at that exact volume:page the author is Zuckerkandl and the topic is protein evolutionary noise.

7. Load-bearing statements (own-words; Springer restrictive)

  • No Fitch paper exists at J Mol Evol vol 7 (verified via full CrossRef vol-7 enumeration).
  • Functional strings (facts): the article at 7:269–311 is by Zuckerkandl, DOI 10.1007/BF01743626; sibling Part I at 7:167–183, DOI 10.1007/BF01731487. Fitch’s ortholog/paralog paper = Syst Zool 19:99 (1970).

8–11. Scope / silences / open questions

  • This note checks attribution resolution only; it does not read or summarize the Zuckerkandl paper’s actual argument.
  • Open: what did the downstream skill mean to cite? Candidate real sources for a synteny/collinearity distinction are not this citation — likely Fitch 1970 (Syst Zool) for homology/orthology terminology or Renwick 1971 for synteny. The correct primary for the “synteny vs collinearity” distinction is not established by this retrieval and needs its own sourcing.

12. Guidance answers

  1. Resolves? No. No Fitch paper in J Mol Evol vol 7. Page 271 → Zuckerkandl 7:269–311. Non-resolving citation is the finding.
  2. Subject of what’s actually there: protein-level evolutionary rates / “evolutionary noise” / selectionist model for random fixations in proteins (Zuckerkandl). Unrelated to synteny.
  3. Defines synteny/collinearity? ABSENT / not supported — no Fitch source; the actual 7:271 paper is off-topic. (Metadata-level; full text not read.)
  4. Related terms: none extractable (no full-text access; but ortholog/paralog belongs to Fitch 1970, a different paper).
  5. Attribution check: retrieval contradicts the Fitch-1976-J-Mol-Evol-7:271 attribution. Synteny commonly → Renwick 1971; Fitch’s terminology paper → 1970 Syst Zool 19:99, not 1976.

design-inference footer: none. Metadata-only attribution check; no full text read.