Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26569124›Full record

ArticleNature genetics2016

Domestication selected for deceleration of the circadian clock in cultivated tomato.

Niels A Müller, Cris L Wijnen, Arunkumar Srinivasan, Malgorzata Ryngajllo, Itai Ofner, Tao Lin, Aashish Ranjan, Donnelly West, Julin N Maloof, Neelima R Sinha and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature genetics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 93 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
93citing papers in PubMed
23.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

93 citing papers in PubMed, 226 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. BioClocks UK: driving robust cycles of discovery to impact.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025
    Review
  12. Circannual Clock inPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

33 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Niels A MüllerDepartment of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany.
Cris L WijnenDepartment of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany.
Arunkumar SrinivasanDepartment of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany.
Malgorzata RyngajlloDepartment of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany.
Itai OfnerInstitute of Plant Sciences, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel.
Tao LinKey Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops of the Ministry of Agriculture, Sino-Dutch Joint Laboratory of Horticultural Genomics, Institute of Vegetables and Flowers, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China.
Aashish RanjanDepartment of Plant Biology, University of California, Davis, California, USA.
Donnelly WestDepartment of Plant Biology, University of California, Davis, California, USA.
Julin N MaloofDepartment of Plant Biology, University of California, Davis, California, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9623-2599
Neelima R SinhaDepartment of Plant Biology, University of California, Davis, California, USA.
Sanwen HuangKey Laboratory of Biology and Genetic Improvement of Horticultural Crops of the Ministry of Agriculture, Sino-Dutch Joint Laboratory of Horticultural Genomics, Institute of Vegetables and Flowers, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8547-5309
Dani ZamirInstitute of Plant Sciences, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Rehovot, Israel.
José M Jiménez-GómezDepartment of Plant Breeding and Genetics, Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research, Cologne, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5033-7192
Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research · DEUniversity of California, Davis · USAgricultural Genomics Institute at Shenzhen · CNHebrew University of Jerusalem · ILCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The circadian clock is a critical regulator of plant physiology and development, controlling key agricultural traits in crop plants. In addition, natural variation in circadian rhythms is important for local adaptation. However, quantitative modulation of circadian rhythms due to artificial selection has not yet been reported. Here we show that the circadian clock of cultivated tomato (Solanum lycopersicum) has slowed during domestication. Allelic variation of the tomato homolog of the Arabidopsis gene EID1 is responsible for a phase delay. Notably, the genomic region harboring EID1 shows signatures of a selective sweep. We find that the EID1 allele in cultivated tomatoes enhances plant performance specifically under long day photoperiods, suggesting that humans selected slower circadian rhythms to adapt the cultivated species to the long summer days it encountered as it was moved away from the equator.

Indexed as

Selection, GeneticAllelesCircadian ClocksCrops, AgriculturalPhotoperiodPhylogenyPlant ProteinsQuantitative Trait LociSolanum lycopersicumPlant Proteins

Identifiers

PMID26569124
OpenAlexW2207354528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.