ArticleApplications in plant sciences2016
A workflow to preserve genome-quality tissue samples from plants in botanical gardens and arboreta.
Article in Applications in plant sciences, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extending Specimens to Save Plant DNA: Structuring Department DNA Collections in Times of Biodiversity Loss.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Green plant genomes: What we know in an era of rapidly expanding opportunities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Microfluidic Enrichment Barcoding (MEBarcoding): a new method for high throughput plant DNA barcoding.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- A protocol for high-throughput, untargeted forest community metabolomics using mass spectrometry molecular networks.Applications in plant sciences · 2018Article
- An efficient field and laboratory workflow for plant phylotranscriptomic projects.Applications in plant sciences · 2017Article
- Guidelines for collecting vouchers and tissues intended for genomic work (Smithsonian Institution): Botany Best Practices.Biodiversity data journal · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
premise of the studyInternationally, gardens hold diverse living collections that can be preserved for genomic research. Workflows have been developed for genomic tissue sampling in other taxa (e.g., vertebrates), but are inadequate for plants. We outline a workflow for tissue sampling intended for two audiences: botanists interested in genomics research and garden staff who plan to voucher living collections. METHODS AND
resultsStandard herbarium methods are used to collect vouchers, label information and images are entered into a publicly accessible database, and leaf tissue is preserved in silica and liquid nitrogen. A five-step approach for genomic tissue sampling is presented for sampling from living collections according to current best practices.
conclusionsCollecting genome-quality samples from gardens is an economical and rapid way to make available for scientific research tissue from the diversity of plants on Earth. The Global Genome Initiative will facilitate and lead this endeavor through international partnerships.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.