ArticlePeerJ2015
Comparative genomics and phylogenetic discordance of cultivated tomato and close wild relatives.
Article in PeerJ, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- A tomato telomere-to-telomere super-pangenome empowers stress resilience breeding.Nature genetics · 2026Article
- Tomato and its relatives are breaking the genomics barriers.Journal of experimental botany · 2025Review
- Chromosome-level genome assembly of Solanum pimpinellifolium.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Phylogenomic discordance suggests polytomies along the backbone of the large genus Solanum.American journal of botany · 2022Article
- Article
- Chromosome-scale genome assemblies of wild tomato relativesHorticulture research · 2022Article
- Next generation sequencing technologies to explore the diversity of germplasm resources: Achievements and trends in tomato.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
- Reprogramming of Retrotransposon Activity during Speciation of the Genus Citrus.Genome biology and evolution · 2019Article
- Benchmarking variant identification tools for plant diversity discovery.BMC genomics · 2019Article
- The tomato pan-genome uncovers new genes and a rare allele regulating fruit flavor.Nature genetics · 2019Article
- Linkage between the I-3 gene for resistance to Fusarium wilt race 3 and increased sensitivity to bacterial spot in tomato.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2018Article
- Genetic Diversity and Population Structure of Two Tomato Species from the Galapagos Islands.Frontiers in plant science · 2017Article
- Variation in the flowering gene SELF PRUNING 5G promotes day-neutrality and early yield in tomato.Nature genetics · 2017Article
- Candidate gene selection and detailed morphological evaluations of fs8.1, a quantitative trait locus controlling tomato fruit shape.Journal of experimental botany · 2015Article
- Analysis of wild-species introgressions in tomato inbreds uncovers ancestral origins.BMC plant biology · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background. Studies of ancestry are difficult in the tomato because it crosses with many wild relatives and species in the tomato clade that have diverged very recently. As a result, the phylogeny in relation to its closest relatives remains uncertain. By using the coding sequence from Solanum lycopersicum, S. galapagense, S. pimpinellifolium, S. corneliomuelleri, and S. tuberosum and the genomic sequence from S. lycopersicum 'Heinz', an heirloom line, S. lycopersicum 'Yellow Pear', and two of cultivated tomato's closest relatives, S. galapagense and S. pimpinellifolium, we have aimed to resolve the phylogenies of these closely related species as well as identify phylogenetic discordance in the reference cultivated tomato. Results. Divergence date estimates suggest that the divergence of S. lycopersicum, S. galapagense, and S. pimpinellifolium happened less than 0.5 MYA. Phylogenies based on 8,857 coding sequences support grouping of S. lycopersicum and S. galapagense, although two secondary trees are also highly represented. A total of 25 genes in our analysis had sites with evidence of positive selection along the S. lycopersicum lineage. Whole genome phylogenies showed that while incongruence is prevalent in genomic comparisons between these genotypes, likely as a result of introgression and incomplete lineage sorting, a primary phylogenetic history was strongly supported. Conclusions. Based on analysis of these genotypes, S. galapagense appears to be closely related to S. lycopersicum, suggesting they had a common ancestor prior to the arrival of an S. galapagense ancestor to the Galápagos Islands, but after divergence of the sequenced S. pimpinellifolium. Genes showing selection along the S. lycopersicum lineage may be important in domestication or selection occurring post-domestication. Further analysis of intraspecific data in these species will help to establish the evolutionary history of cultivated tomato. The use of an heirloom line is helpful in deducing true phylogenetic information of S. lycopersicum and identifying regions of introgression from wild species.
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.