ArticlePloS one2014
Conserving plants in gene banks and nature: investigating complementarity with Trifolium thompsonii Morton.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic diversity among genotypes of3 Biotech · 2022Article
- The Potential of Payment for Ecosystem Services for Crop Wild Relative Conservation.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- European maize landraces made accessible for plant breeding and genome-based studies.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2019Article
- Genetic diversity of Chamaecrista fasciculata (Fabaceae) from the USDA germplasm collection.BMC research notes · 2019Article
- Article
- Dealing with AFLP genotyping errors to reveal genetic structure in Plukenetia volubilis (Euphorbiaceae) in the Peruvian Amazon.PloS one · 2017Article
- Genetic Distinctiveness of Rye In situ Accessions from Portugal Unveils a New Hotspot of Unexplored Genetic Resources.Frontiers in plant science · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A standard conservation strategy for plant genetic resources integrates in situ (on-farm or wild) and ex situ (gene or field bank) approaches. Gene bank managers collect ex situ accessions that represent a comprehensive snap shot of the genetic diversity of in situ populations at a given time and place. Although simple in theory, achieving complementary in situ and ex situ holdings is challenging. Using Trifolium thompsonii as a model insect-pollinated herbaceous perennial species, we used AFLP markers to compare genetic diversity and structure of ex situ accessions collected at two time periods (1995, 2004) from four locations, with their corresponding in situ populations sampled in 2009. Our goal was to assess the complementarity of the two approaches. We examined how gene flow, selection and genetic drift contributed to population change. Across locations, we found no difference in diversity between ex situ and in situ samples. One population showed a decline in genetic diversity over the 15 years studied. Population genetic differentiation among the four locations was significant, but weak. Association tests suggested infrequent, long distance gene flow. Selection and drift occurred, but differences due to spatial effects were three times as strong as differences attributed to temporal effects, and suggested recollection efforts could occur at intervals greater than fifteen years. An effective collecting strategy for insect pollinated herbaceous perennial species was to sample >150 plants, equalize maternal contribution, and sample along random transects with sufficient space between plants to minimize intrafamilial sampling. Quantifying genetic change between ex situ and in situ accessions allows genetic resource managers to validate ex situ collecting and maintenance protocols, develop appropriate recollection intervals, and provide an early detection mechanism for identifying problematic conditions that can be addressed to prevent further decline in vulnerable in situ populations.
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.