Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37828930›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in plant science2023

Comparative analyses of Linderniaceae plastomes, with implications for its phylogeny and evolution.

Rongrong Yan, Yanfei Geng, Yuhuan Jia, Chunlei Xiang, Xinxin Zhou, Guoxiong Hu

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Ecology and evolution · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Characterization of the complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026
    Article
  7. PhytoKeys · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. PhytoKeys · 2025
    Article
  12. Article
  13. The complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2024
    Article
  14. New Insights into Phylogenetic Relationship ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Rongrong YanKey Laboratory of Plant Resource Conservation and Germplasm Innovation in Mountainous Region (Ministry of Education), Guizhou University, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Yanfei GengCollege of Tea Science, Guizhou University, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Yuhuan JiaKey Laboratory of Plant Resource Conservation and Germplasm Innovation in Mountainous Region (Ministry of Education), Guizhou University, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Chunlei XiangKey Laboratory for Plant Diversity and Biogeography of East Asia, Kunming Institute of Botany, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Kunming, Yunnan, China.
Xinxin ZhouSouth China Botanical Garden, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Guoxiong HuKey Laboratory of Plant Resource Conservation and Germplasm Innovation in Mountainous Region (Ministry of Education), Guizhou University, Guiyang, Guizhou, China.
Guizhou University · CNChinese Academy of Sciences · CNSouth China Botanical Garden · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The recently established Linderniaceae, separated from the traditionally defined Scrophulariaceae, is a taxonomically complicated family. Although previous phylogenetic studies based on a few short DNA markers have made great contributions to the taxonomy of Linderniaceae, limited sampling and low resolution of the phylogenetic tree have failed to resolve controversies between some generic circumscriptions. The plastid genome exhibits a powerful ability to solve phylogenetic relationships ranging from shallow to deep taxonomic levels. To date, no plastid phylogenomic studies have been carried out in Linderniaceae. Methods: In this study, we newly sequenced 26 plastid genomes of Linderniaceae, including eight genera and 25 species, to explore the phylogenetic relationships and genome evolution of the family through plastid phylogenomic and comparative genomic analyses. Results: The plastid genome size of Linderniaceae ranged from 152,386 bp to 154,402 bp, exhibiting a typical quartile structure. All plastomes encoded 114 unique genes, comprising 80 protein-coding genes, 30 tRNA genes, and four rRNA genes. The inverted repeat regions were more conserved compared with the single-copy regions. A total of 1803 microsatellites and 1909 long sequence repeats were identified, and five hypervariable regions ( Discussion: Comparative analyses showed the Linderniaceae plastomes were highly conservative in terms of structure, gene order, and gene content. Combining morphological and molecular evidence, we supported the newly established

Indexed as

chloroplast genomeLinderniaLindernieaephylogenomicsPicriaScrophulariaceaeTorenia

Identifiers

PMID37828930
PMCPMC10565954
OpenAlexW4387106388

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.