ArticlePloS one2015
Comparative and evolutionary analyses of Meloidogyne spp. Based on mitochondrial genome sequences.
Article in PloS one, 2015. 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.
- Reproductive mode and ploidy are associated with distinct organization of clustered centromeric regions in Meloidogyne nematodes.Genome biology · 2026Article
- Integrative taxonomy and mitogenome characterization of the root-knot nematode Meloidogyne silvestris.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Satellitome analyses in nematodes illuminate complex species history and show conserved features in satellite DNAs.BMC biology · 2022Article
- The Centromere Histone Is Conserved and Associated with Tandem Repeats Sharing a Conserved 19-bp Box in the Holocentromere of Meloidogyne Nematodes.Molecular biology and evolution · 2021Article
- A new root-knot nematode, Meloidogyne vitis sp. nov. (Nematoda: Meloidogynidae), parasitizing grape in Yunnan.PloS one · 2021Article
- Multigene phylogeny of root-knot nematodes and molecular characterization of Meloidogyne nataliei Golden, Rose & Bird, 1981 (Nematoda: Tylenchida).Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Mitochondrial genome diversity in dagger and needle nematodes (Nematoda: Longidoridae).Scientific reports · 2017Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Molecular taxonomy and evolution of nematodes have been recently the focus of several studies. Mitochondrial sequences were proposed as an alternative for precise identification of Meloidogyne species, to study intraspecific variability and to follow maternal lineages. We characterized the mitochondrial genomes (mtDNAs) of the root knot nematodes M. floridensis, M. hapla and M. incognita. These were AT rich (81-83%) and highly compact, encoding 12 proteins, 2 rRNAs, and 22 tRNAs. Comparisons with published mtDNAs of M. chitwoodi, M. incognita (another strain) and M. graminicola revealed that they share protein and rRNA gene order but differ in the order of tRNAs. The mtDNAs of M. floridensis and M. incognita were strikingly similar (97-100% identity for all coding regions). In contrast, M. floridensis, M. chitwoodi, M. hapla and M. graminicola showed 65-84% nucleotide identity for coding regions. Variable mitochondrial sequences are potentially useful for evolutionary and taxonomic studies. We developed a molecular taxonomic marker by sequencing a highly-variable ~2 kb mitochondrial region, nad5-cox1, from 36 populations of root-knot nematodes to elucidate relationships within the genus Meloidogyne. Isolates of five species formed monophyletic groups and showed little intraspecific variability. We also present a thorough analysis of the mitochondrial region cox2-rrnS. Phylogenies based on either mitochondrial region had good discrimination power but could not discriminate between M. arenaria, M. incognita and M. floridensis.
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.