Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24710040›Full record

ArticleGenes2010

Review of the Application of Modern Cytogenetic Methods (FISH/GISH) to the Study of Reticulation (Polyploidy/Hybridisation).

Michael Chester, Andrew R Leitch, Pamela S Soltis, Douglas E Soltis

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genes, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 79 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Distribution patterns of rDNA loci in theComparative cytogenetics · 2022
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Deciphering the Origin and Evolution of the XInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Article
  13. 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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael ChesterDepartment of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA. mchester@ufl.edu.
Andrew R LeitchSchool of Biological and Chemical Sciences, Queen Mary, University of London, UK. a.r.leitch@qmul.ac.uk.
Pamela S SoltisFlorida Museum of Natural History, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA. psoltis@flmnh.ufl.edu.
Douglas E SoltisDepartment of Biology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida 32611, USA. dsoltis@ufl.edu.
University of Florida · USFlorida Museum of Natural History · USQueen Mary University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The convergence of distinct lineages upon interspecific hybridisation, including when accompanied by increases in ploidy (allopolyploidy), is a driving force in the origin of many plant species. In plant breeding too, both interspecific hybridisation and allopolyploidy are important because they facilitate introgression of alien DNA into breeding lines enabling the introduction of novel characters. Here we review how fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) and genomic in situ hybridisation (GISH) have been applied to: 1) studies of interspecific hybridisation and polyploidy in nature, 2) analyses of phylogenetic relationships between species, 3) genetic mapping and 4) analysis of plant breeding materials. We also review how FISH is poised to take advantage of nextgeneration sequencing (NGS) technologies, helping the rapid characterisation of the repetitive fractions of a genome in natural populations and agricultural plants.

Identifiers

PMID24710040
PMCPMC3954085
OpenAlexW2000985033

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.