Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26774060›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of heredity2016

Genetic Diversity of the Two Commercial Tetraploid Cotton Species in the Gossypium Diversity Reference Set.

Lori L Hinze, Elodie Gazave, Michael A Gore, David D Fang, Brian E Scheffler, John Z Yu, Don C Jones, James Frelichowski, Richard G Percy

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of heredity, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing 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

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Construction ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Lori L HinzeFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones). Lori.Hinze@ars.usda.gov.
Elodie GazaveFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).
Michael A GoreFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).
David D FangFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).
Brian E SchefflerFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).
John Z YuFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).
Don C JonesFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).
James FrelichowskiFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).
Richard G PercyFrom the USDA-ARS, Southern Plains Agricultural Research Center, Crop Germplasm Research Unit, College Station, TX (Hinze, Yu, Frelichowski, and Percy); School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY (Gazave and Gore); USDA-ARS, Southern Regional Research Center, Cotton Fiber Bioscience Research Unit, New Orleans, LA (Fang); USDA-ARS, Jamie Whitten Delta States Research Center, Genomics and Bioinformatics Research Unit, Stoneville, MS (Scheffler); and Cotton Incorporated, Cary, NC (Jones).

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A diversity reference set has been constructed for the Gossypium accessions in the US National Cotton Germplasm Collection to facilitate more extensive evaluation and utilization of accessions held in the Collection. A set of 105 mapped simple sequence repeat markers was used to study the allelic diversity of 1933 tetraploid Gossypium accessions representative of the range of diversity of the improved and wild accessions of G. hirsutum and G. barbadense. The reference set contained 410 G. barbadense accessions and 1523 G. hirsutum accessions. Observed numbers of polymorphic and private bands indicated a greater diversity in G. hirsutum as compared to G. barbadense as well as in wild-type accessions as compared to improved accessions in both species. The markers clearly differentiated the 2 species. Patterns of diversity within species were observed but not clearly delineated, with much overlap occurring between races and regions of origin for wild accessions and between historical and geographic breeding pools for cultivated accessions. Although the percentage of accessions showing introgression was higher among wild accessions than cultivars in both species, the average level of introgression within individual accessions, as indicated by species-specific bands, was much higher in wild accessions of G. hirsutum than in wild accessions of G. barbadense. The average level of introgression within individual accessions was higher in improved G. barbadense cultivars than in G. hirsutum cultivars. This molecular characterization reveals the levels and distributions of genetic diversity that will allow for better exploration and utilization of cotton genetic resources.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationTetraploidyAllelesDNA, PlantGenetic MarkersGossypiumMicrosatellite RepeatsPlant BreedingPrincipal Component AnalysisSequence Analysis, DNASpecies SpecificityDNA, PlantGenetic Markersgermplasm collectionGossypium barbadenseGossypium hirsutumintrogressionpopulation structure

Identifiers

PMID26774060
PMCPMC4885238

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.