ArticleBiotechnology, biotechnological equipment2014
Assessment of genetic variation in Bulgarian tomato (
Article in Biotechnology, biotechnological equipment, 2014. 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.
- Morpho-phytochemical and molecular diversity in cherry tomato (Solanum lycopersicum var. cerasiforme) germplasm.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Next generation sequencing technologies to explore the diversity of germplasm resources: Achievements and trends in tomato.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
- Morphological Diversity, Genetic Characterization, and Phytochemical Assessment of the Cypriot Tomato Germplasm.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Genetic variation among Saudi tomato (Saudi journal of biological sciences · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genetic variability in modern crops is limited due to domestication and selection processes. Genetic variation in eight Bulgarian tomato varieties and breeding lines (variety Plovdivska karotina, variety IZK Alya, L21β, L53β, L1140, L1116, L975, L984) differing in their morphological and biochemical composition was assessed using a highly efficient and low-cost fluorescent simple sequence repeat (SSR) genotyping platform. Genotyping was conducted with 165 publicly available microsatellite markers developed from different research groups under a number of projects in tomato (SOL Genomics SSRs, Kazusa TGS and TES, SLM, TMS and LEMDDNa) among which only five (3.03%) failed to amplify the expected PCR fragments. Of the remaining markers, 81 (50.62%) were polymorphic in the whole collection of eight genotypes. Among the marker groups used, SLM markers were most polymorphic, followed by TMS and SOL Genomics SSR markers. The total number of amplified alleles was 299, with a mean of 1.869; and the average polymorphic information content (
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.