Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26579190›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2015

Sequenced genomes and rapidly emerging technologies pave the way for conifer evolutionary developmental biology.

Daniel Uddenberg, Shirin Akhter, Prashanth Ramachandran, Jens F Sundström, Annelie Carlsbecker

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Model Species to Investigate the Origin of Flowers.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. DNA methylome of the 20-gigabase Norway spruce genome.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2016
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Daniel UddenbergPhysiological Botany, Department of Organismal Biology and Linnean Centre for Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Uppsala University , Uppsala, Sweden.
Shirin AkhterDepartment of Plant Biology and Linnean Centre for Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences , Uppsala, Sweden.
Prashanth RamachandranPhysiological Botany, Department of Organismal Biology and Linnean Centre for Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Uppsala University , Uppsala, Sweden.
Jens F SundströmDepartment of Plant Biology and Linnean Centre for Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences , Uppsala, Sweden.
Annelie CarlsbeckerPhysiological Botany, Department of Organismal Biology and Linnean Centre for Plant Biology, Uppsala BioCenter, Uppsala University , Uppsala, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Conifers, Ginkgo, cycads and gnetophytes comprise the four groups of extant gymnosperms holding a unique position of sharing common ancestry with the angiosperms. Comparative studies of gymnosperms and angiosperms are the key to a better understanding of ancient seed plant morphologies, how they have shifted over evolution to shape modern day species, and how the genes governing these morphologies have evolved. However, conifers and other gymnosperms have been notoriously difficult to study due to their long generation times, inaccessibility to genetic experimentation and unavailable genome sequences. Now, with three draft genomes from spruces and pines, rapid advances in next generation sequencing methods for genome wide expression analyses, and enhanced methods for genetic transformation, we are much better equipped to address a number of key evolutionary questions relating to seed plant evolution. In this mini-review we highlight recent progress in conifer developmental biology relevant to evo-devo questions. We discuss how genome sequence data and novel techniques might allow us to explore genetic variation and naturally occurring conifer mutants, approaches to reduce long generation times to allow for genetic studies in conifers, and other potential upcoming research avenues utilizing current and emergent techniques. Results from developmental studies of conifers and other gymnosperms in comparison to those in angiosperms will provide information to trace core molecular developmental control tool kits of ancestral seed plants, but foremost they will greatly improve our understanding of the biology of conifers and other gymnosperms in their own right.

Indexed as

gymnospermsnext-generation sequencingplant developmental biologyplant evo-devoplant transformation

Identifiers

PMID26579190
PMCPMC4630563

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.