Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15095058›Full record

ReviewFunctional & integrative genomics2004

Molecular markers from the transcribed/expressed region of the genome in higher plants.

P K Gupta, S Rustgi

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Functional & integrative genomics, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Seed coat colour of Indian mustard [Frontiers in plant science · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Conserved DNA-derived polymorphism, new markers for genetic diversity analysis of TunisianPhysiology and molecular biology of plants : an international journal of functional plant biology · 2019
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

P K GuptaMolecular Biology Laboratory, Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding, Ch. Charan Singh University, 250 004, Meerut, India. pkgupta36@vsnl.com
S Rustgi

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, molecular marker technology in higher plants has witnessed a shift from the so-called random DNA markers (RDMs), developed in the past arbitrarily from genomic DNA and cDNA, to the molecular markers representing the transcriptome and the other coding sequences. These markers have been described as gene targeted markers (GTMs). Another specific class of markers includes the so-called functional markers (FMs), which are supposed to have a cause and effect relationship with the traits of interest. In this review, we first describe the development of these markers representing the transcriptome or genes per se; we then discuss the uses of these markers in some detail and finally add a note on the future directions of research and the implications of the wider application of these markers in crop improvement programmes. Using suitable examples, we describe markers of different classes derived from cDNA clones, expressed sequence tags (ESTs), gene sequences and the unique (coding) sequences obtained through methyl filtration or genome normalization (high C(0) t fraction) from gDNA libraries. While we briefly describe RFLPs, SSRs, AFLPs and SNPs developed from the transcriptome (cDNA clones and EST databases), we have discussed in more detail some of the novel markers developed from the transcriptome and specific genes. These novel markers include expressed sequence tag polymorphisms (ESTPs), conserved orthologue set (COS) markers, amplified consensus genetic markers (ACGMs), gene specific tags (GSTs), resistance gene analogues (RGAs) and exon-retrotransposon amplification polymorphism (ERAP). Uses of these markers have been discussed in some detail under the following headings: development of transcript and functional maps, estimations of genetic diversity, marker-assisted selection (MAS), candidate-gene (CG) approach and map-based cloning, genetical genomics and identification of eQTLs, study of genome organization and taxonomic and phylogenetic studies. At the end, we also append a list of websites relevant to further studies on the transcriptome. For want of space, considerable information including voluminous data in the form of 12 tables, and a long list of references cited in these tables, has been placed on the Internet as electronic supplementary material (ESM), which the readers may find useful.

Indexed as

Transcription, GeneticChromosome MappingGene Expression Regulation, PlantGenetic MarkersGenome, PlantPlantsGenetic Markers

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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 OpenQuestion graph.