ArticlePloS one2012
What an rRNA secondary structure tells about phylogeny of fungi in Ascomycota with emphasis on evolution of major types of ascus.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The cup fungus Pestalopezia brunneopruinosa is Pestalotiopsis gibbosa and belongs to Sordariomycetes.PloS one · 2018Article
- Phylogenomic analysis uncovers the evolutionary history of nutrition and infection mode in rice blast fungus and other Magnaporthales.Scientific reports · 2015Article
- The genome and development-dependent transcriptomes of Pyronema confluens: a window into fungal evolution.PLoS genetics · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRNA secondary structure is highly conserved throughout evolution. The higher order structure is fundamental in establishing important structure-function relationships. Nucleotide sequences from ribosomal RNA (rRNA) genes have made a great contribution to our understanding of Ascomycota phylogeny. However, filling the gaps between molecular phylogeny and morphological assumptions based on ascus dehiscence modes and type of fruitbodies at the higher level classification of the phylum remains an unfulfilled task faced by mycologists. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL
findingsWe selected some major groups of Ascomycota to view their phylogenetic relationships based on analyses of rRNA secondary structure. Using rRNA secondary structural information, here, we converted nucleotide sequences into the structure ones over a 20-symbol code. Our structural analyses together with ancestral character state reconstruction produced reasonable phylogenetic position for the class Geoglossomycetes as opposed to the classic nucleotide analyses. Judging from the secondary structure analyses with consideration of mode of ascus dehiscence and the ability of forming fruitbodies, we draw a clear picture of a possible evolutionary route for fungal asci and some major groups of fungi in Ascomycota. The secondary structure trees show a more reasonable phylogenetic position for the class Geoglossomycetes.
conclusionsOur results illustrate that asci lacking of any dehiscence mechanism represent the most primitive type. Passing through the operculate and Orbilia-type asci, bitunicate asci occurred. The evolution came to the most advanced inoperculate type. The ascus-producing fungi might be derived from groups lacking of the capacity to form fruitbodies, and then evolved multiple times. The apothecial type of fruitbodies represents the ancestral state, and the ostiolar type is advanced. The class Geoglossomycetes is closely related to Leotiomycetes and Sordariomycetes having a similar ascus type other than it was originally placed based on nucleotide sequence analyses.
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.