Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21318354›Full record

ArticlePlant cell reports2011

Revisiting the DNA C-values of the genome size-standards used in plant flow cytometry to choose the "best primary standards".

Milene Miranda Praça-Fontes, Carlos Roberto Carvalho, Wellington Ronildo Clarindo, Cosme Damião Cruz

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Plant cell reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. In Vitro Polyploidization ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Reference standards for flow cytometric estimation of absolute nuclear DNA content in plants.Cytometry. Part A : the journal of the International Society for Analytical Cytology · 2022
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. New Insights Into the Evolution of CFrontiers in plant science · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors.

Milene Miranda Praça-FontesLaboratório de Microscopia, Departamento de Produção Vegetal, Centro de Ciências Agrárias, Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo, Alegre, ES, Brazil.
Carlos Roberto Carvalho
Wellington Ronildo Clarindo
Cosme Damião Cruz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Flow cytometry (FCM) techniques have enabled characterization of the genome size for various plant species. In order to measure the nuclear genome size of a species, reference standards with well-established DNA content are necessary. However, different 2C-values have been described for the same species used as reference standard. This fact has brought about inaccurate genome measurements, making relevant the establishment of optimal DNA reference standards for plant cytometric analyses. Our work revisited the genome size of Arabidopsis thaliana and other seven plant standards, which were denominated "Doležel's standard set" and have been widely used in plant DNA measurements. These eight plant standards were reassessed for a comparative measurement of their DNA content values, using each plant species as primary standard in a cascade-like manner, from A. thaliana to Allium cepa. The genome size values obtained here were compared to those reported in the literature by statistical analyses. As a result, Raphanus sativus and Drosophila melanogaster were considered the most inadequate primary standards, whereas A. thaliana, Solanum lycopersicum and Pisum sativum were found to be the most suitable.

Indexed as

Flow CytometryGenome, PlantAlliumAnimalsArabidopsisCell NucleusDNA, PlantDrosophilaGlycine maxRaphanusReference StandardsSolanum lycopersicumZea maysDNA, Plant

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.