ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2016
Comparative analysis of microsatellites in five different antagonistic Trichoderma species for diversity assessment.
Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Genome wide comparative analysis of microsatellites in Bipolaris sorokiniana for diversity analysis and spot blotch disease diagnosis in wheat.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026Article
- Molecular Characterization Reveals Biodiversity and Biopotential of Rhizobacterial Isolates of Bacillus Spp.Microbial ecology · 2024Article
- Virulence and pathogenicity determinants in whole genome sequence ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Comparative analysis of nineFrontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Article
- Synergistic Effect ofFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Identification of Novel Microsatellite Markers to Assess the Population Structure and Genetic Differentiation ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2019Article
- Trichoderma for climate resilient agriculture.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2017Review
- Identification, characterization and phylogenetic analysis of antifungalSpringerPlus · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microsatellites provide an ideal molecular markers system to screen, characterize and evaluate genetic diversity of several fungal species. Currently, there is very limited information on the genetic diversity of antagonistic Trichoderma species as determined using a range of molecular markers. In this study, expressed and whole genome sequences available in public database were used to investigate the occurrence, relative abundance and relative density of SSRs in five different antagonistic Trichoderma species: Trichoderma atroviride, T. harzianum, T. reesei, T. virens and T. asperellum. Fifteen SSRs loci were used to evaluate genetic diversity of twenty isolates of Trichoderma spp. from different geographical regions of India. Results indicated that relative abundance and relative density of SSRs were higher in T. asperellum followed by T. reesei and T. atroviride. Tri-nucleotide repeats (80.2%) were invariably the most abundant in all species. The abundance and relative density of SSRs were not influenced by the genome sizes and GC content. Out of eighteen primer sets, only 15 primer pairs showed successful amplification in all the test species. A total of 24 alleles were detected and five loci were highly informative with polymorphism information content values greater than 0.40, these markers provide useful information on genetic diversity and population genetic structure, which, in turn, can exploit for establishing conservation strategy for antagonistic Trichoderma isolates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26712623What 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.