Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22838958›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2012

Cross-species testing and utility of microsatellite loci in Indirana frogs.

Abhilash Nair, Sujith V Gopalan, Sanil George, K Santhosh Kumar, Juha Merilä

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Abhilash NairEcological Genetics Research Unit, Department of Biosciences, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, FI-00014, Finland. abhilash.nair@helsinki.fi
Sujith V Gopalan
Sanil George
K Santhosh Kumar
Juha Merilä
Rajiv Gandhi Centre for Biotechnology · INUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMicrosatellite loci are widely used in population and conservation genetic studies of amphibians, but the availability of such markers for tropical and subtropical taxa is currently very limited. In order to develop resources for conservation genetic studies in the genus Indirana, we tested amplification success and polymorphism in 62 previously developed microsatellite loci, in eight Indirana species - including new candidate species. Developing genomic resources for this amphibian taxon is particularly important as it is endemic to the Western Ghats biodiversity hotspot, and harbours several endangered species.

findingsThe cross-species amplification success rate varied from 11.3 % to 29.0 % depending on the species, with 29 - 80 % of the amplifying loci being polymorphic. A strong negative correlation between cross-species amplification success (and polymorphism) and genetic distance separating target from source species was observed.

conclusionsOur results provide additional genetic support for the existence of genetically divergent cryptic species within the genus Indirana. The tested markers should be useful for population and conservation genetic studies in this genus, and in particular, for species closely related to the source species, I. beddomii.

Indexed as

Endangered SpeciesGenetic LociGenomicsMicrosatellite RepeatsAnimalsDatabases, GeneticDNA, MitochondrialEvolution, MolecularGenetic MarkersIndiaPolymerase Chain ReactionPolymorphism, GeneticRanidaeRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSpecies SpecificityDNA, MitochondrialGenetic MarkersRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID22838958
PMCPMC3441609
OpenAlexW2093941773

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.