ArticleEcology and evolution2012
A European phylogeography of Rhinanthus minor compared to Rhinanthus angustifolius: unexpected splits and signs of hybridization.
Article in Ecology and evolution, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- DNA barcoding a taxonomically complex hemiparasitic genus reveals deep divergence between ploidy levels but lack of species-level resolution.AoB PLANTS · 2018Article
- The effects of locus number, genetic divergence, and genotyping error on the utility of dominant markers for hybrid identification.Ecology and evolution · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rhinanthus minor and Rhinanthus angustifolius (Orobanchaceae) are annual hemiparasites, which occur sympatrically in Europe and are known to hybridize. We studied chloroplast and nuclear (amplified fragment length polymorphism [AFLP]) diversity in R. minor and compared genetic structuring in this species with R. angustifolius by analyzing the AFLP data for both species simultaneously. The AFLP data revealed that populations in Italy, Greece, and southeast Russia initially identified as R. minor were so distant from the other R. minor populations that they probably belong to another, yet unidentified taxon, and we refer to them as Rhinanthus sp. R. minor s.s. showed a clear geographic genetic structure in both the chloroplast DNA (cpDNA) and nuclear genome. The simultaneous analysis of both species shed new light on the previously published findings for R. angustifolius, because some populations now turned out to belong to R. minor. The admixture analysis revealed very few individuals of mixed R. minor-R.angustifolius ancestry in the natural populations in the west of Europe, while admixture levels were higher in the east. The combined haplotype network showed that haplotype H1 was shared among all species and is likely to be ancestral. H2 was more abundant in R. angustifolius and H3 in R. minor, and the latter probably arose from H1 in this species in the east of Europe. The occurrence of H3 in R. angustifolius may be explained by introgression from R. minor, but without interspecific admixture, these are likely to have been old hybridization events. Our study underlines the importance of including related species in phylogeographic studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.