ArticleBMC genomics2023
Insights into phylogenetic relationships in Pinus inferred from a comparative analysis of complete chloroplast genomes.
Article in BMC genomics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative plastid genomics of Gastrochilus (Orchidaceae) with insights into molecular markers and phylogeny.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- Insights into the chloroplast genome diversity of the genus Isatis in China.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Complete chloroplast genome sequencing of Pseudocodon convolvulaceus, a medicinal herb from Qinghai-Tibet Plateau in China.PloS one · 2025Article
- Complete chloroplast genomes of eight Delphinium taxa (Ranunculaceae) endemic to Xinjiang, China: insights into genome structure, comparative analysis, and phylogenetic relationships.BMC plant biology · 2024Article
- Characterization of the Plastid Genomes of FourPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPinus is the largest genus of Pinaceae and the most primitive group of modern genera. Pines have become the focus of many molecular evolution studies because of their wide use and ecological significance. However, due to the lack of complete chloroplast genome data, the evolutionary relationship and classification of pines are still controversial. With the development of new generation sequencing technology, sequence data of pines are becoming abundant. Here, we systematically analyzed and summarized the chloroplast genomes of 33 published pine species.
resultsGenerally, pines chloroplast genome structure showed strong conservation and high similarity. The chloroplast genome length ranged from 114,082 to 121,530 bp with similar positions and arrangements of all genes, while the GC content ranged from 38.45 to 39.00%. Reverse repeats showed a shrinking evolutionary trend, with IRa/IRb length ranging from 267 to 495 bp. A total of 3,205 microsatellite sequences and 5,436 repeats were detected in the studied species chloroplasts. Additionally, two hypervariable regions were assessed, providing potential molecular markers for future phylogenetic studies and population genetics. Through the phylogenetic analysis of complete chloroplast genomes, we offered novel opinions on the genus traditional evolutionary theory and classification.
conclusionWe compared and analyzed the chloroplast genomes of 33 pine species, verified the traditional evolutionary theory and classification, and reclassified some controversial species classification. This study is helpful in analyzing the evolution, genetic structure, and the development of chloroplast DNA markers in Pinus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.