Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27590334›Full record

ArticleAnnals of botany2016

DArT whole genome profiling provides insights on the evolution and taxonomy of edible Banana (Musa spp.).

J Sardos, X Perrier, J Doležel, E Hřibová, P Christelová, I Van den Houwe, A Kilian, N Roux

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of botany, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

29 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Striking variation in chromosome structure withinFrontiers in plant science · 2024
    Article
  4. Genetic Diversity Analysis of Banana Cultivars (Current issues in molecular biology · 2023
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Scientific opinion on the import ofEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2021
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Chromosome reciprocal translocations have accompanied subspecies evolution in bananas.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2020
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Genome ancestry mosaics reveal multiple and cryptic contributors to cultivated banana.The Plant journal : for cell and molecular biology · 2020
    Article
  20. 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

8 authors.

J SardosBioversity International, Parc Scientifique Agropolis II, 1990 boulevard de la Lironde, 34397 Montpellier Cedex 5, France j.sardos@cgiar.org.
X PerrierCIRAD, UMR AGAP, 34398 Montpellier, France.
J DoleželInstitute of Experimental Botany, Centre of the Region Haná for Biotechnological and Agricultural Research, Šlechtitelů 31, 78371 Olomouc, Czech Republic.
E HřibováInstitute of Experimental Botany, Centre of the Region Haná for Biotechnological and Agricultural Research, Šlechtitelů 31, 78371 Olomouc, Czech Republic.
P ChristelováInstitute of Experimental Botany, Centre of the Region Haná for Biotechnological and Agricultural Research, Šlechtitelů 31, 78371 Olomouc, Czech Republic.
I Van den HouweBioversity International, Willem De Croylaan 42, 3001 Leuven, Belgium.
A KilianDiversity Arrays Technology Pty Ltd, Building 3, University of Canberra, Bruce, ACT 2617, Australia.
N RouxBioversity International, Parc Scientifique Agropolis II, 1990 boulevard de la Lironde, 34397 Montpellier Cedex 5, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsDessert and cooking bananas are vegetatively propagated crops of great importance for both the subsistence and the livelihood of people in developing countries. A wide diversity of diploid and triploid cultivars including AA, AB, AS, AT, AAA, AAB, ABB, AAS and AAT genomic constitutions exists. Within each of this genome groups, cultivars are classified into subgroups that are reported to correspond to varieties clonally derived from each other after a single sexual event. The number of those founding events at the basis of the diversity of bananas is a matter of debate.

methodsWe analysed a large panel of 575 accessions, 94 wild relatives and 481 cultivated accessions belonging to the section Musa with a set of 498 DArT markers previously developed. KEY

resultsDArT appeared successful and accurate to describe Musa diversity and help in the resolution of cultivated banana genome constitution and taxonomy, and highlighted discrepancies in the acknowledged classification of some accessions. This study also argues for at least two centres of domestication corresponding to South-East Asia and New Guinea, respectively. Banana domestication in New Guinea probably followed different schemes that those previously reported where hybridization underpins the emergence of edible banana. In addition, our results suggest that not all wild ancestors of bananas are known, especially in M. acuminata subspecies. We also estimate the extent of the two consecutive bottlenecks in edible bananas by evaluating the number of sexual founding events underlying our sets of edible diploids and triploids, respectively.

conclusionsThe attribution of clone identity to each sample of the sets allowed the detection of subgroups represented by several sets of clones. Although morphological characterization of some of the accessions is needed to correct potentially erroneous classifications, some of the subgroups seem polyclonal.

Indexed as

BiodiversityBiological EvolutionDNA, PlantGenetic MarkersGenome, PlantMusaOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPlant BreedingSequence Analysis, DNADNA, PlantGenetic MarkersbananaclassificationDArTdomesticationMusa acuminataMusa balbisianaMusa spp.taxonomy

Identifiers

PMID27590334
PMCPMC5155597

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.