ArticleGenetica2010
Elucidating genetic relationships, diversity and population structure among the Turkish female figs.
Article in Genetica, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A collection of 96 female Turkish fig (Ficus carica L.) accessions was studied to elucidate genetic structure and estimate diversity and genetic similarity distribution among the female figs present in Turkish genetic resources, using 157 molecular genome markers including 129 sequence-related amplified polymorphisms, 21 random amplified polymorphic DNAs, and 7 simple-sequence repeats. The plant samples mainly included Turkish fig collections selected throughout the country over the course of a half-century. Neighbor-joining analysis revealed continuous dissimilarity range, and it was difficult to classify figs into distinct groups. The principle component analysis produced similar results. The analysis of molecular variance indicated that 95 and 93% of genetic variation were explained by within geographic origins and similar fruit rind color, respectively. Sub-structuring Bayesian analysis assigned the 96 female figs into four sub-populations, and indicated that they were highly related. The corrected allelic pairwise distances among the six geographic origins were less than 5%. This study suggests that geography- and color-based groups were not genetically distinct among the Turkish figs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19711187What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.