ArticlePloS one2013
Towards a transferable and cost-effective plant AFLP protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- From Species to Varieties: How Modern Sequencing Technologies Are Shaping Medicinal Plant Identification.Genes · 2024Review
- Genome-wide mapping using new AFLP markers to explore intraspecific variation among pathogenic Sporothrix species.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2020Article
- Article
- Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Amplified fragment length polymorphism (AFLP) is a powerful fingerprinting technique that is widely applied in ecological and population genetic studies. However, its routine use has been limited by high costs associated with the optimization of fluorescently labelled markers, especially for individual study systems. Here we develop a low-cost AFLP protocol that can be easily transferred between distantly related plant taxa. Three fluorescently labelled EcoRI-primers with anchors that target interspecifically conserved genomic regions were used in combination with a single non-labelled primer in our AFLP protocol. The protocol was used to genotype one gymnosperm, two monocot and three eudicot plant genera representing four invasive and four native angiosperm species (Pinus pinaster (Pinaceae), Pennisetum setaceum and Poa annua (Poaceae), Lantana camara (Verbenaceae), Bassia diffusa (Chenopodiaceae), Salvia lanceolata, Salvia africana-lutea, and Salvia africana-caerulea (Lamiaceae)). Highly polymorphic and reproducible genotypic fingerprints (between 37-144 polymorphic loci per species tested) were obtained for all taxa tested. Our single protocol was easily transferred between distantly related taxa. Measures of expected heterozygosity ranged from 0.139 to 0.196 for P. annua and from 0.168 to 0.272 for L. camara which compared well with previously published reports. In addition to ease of transferability of a single AFLP protocol, our protocol reduces costs associated with commercial kits by almost half. The use of highly conserved but abundant anchor sequences reduces the need for laborious screening for usable primers that result in polymorphic fingerprints, and appears to be the main reason for ease of transferability of our protocol between distantly related taxa.
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.