Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27902727›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Hybrid Origins of Citrus Varieties Inferred from DNA Marker Analysis of Nuclear and Organelle Genomes.

Tokurou Shimizu, Akira Kitajima, Keisuke Nonaka, Terutaka Yoshioka, Satoshi Ohta, Shingo Goto, Atsushi Toyoda, Asao Fujiyama, Takako Mochizuki, Hideki Nagasaki and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 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. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Genomic origin ofHorticulture research · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Allelic haplotype combinations at theFrontiers in plant science · 2023
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

12 authors.

Tokurou ShimizuDivision of Citrus Research, Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science, NARO, Shimizu, Shizuoka, Japan.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3554-3964
Akira KitajimaExperimental Farm, Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, Kizugawa, Kyoto, Japan.
Keisuke NonakaDivision of Citrus Research, Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science, NARO, Shimizu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Terutaka YoshiokaDivision of Citrus Research, Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science, NARO, Shimizu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Satoshi OhtaDivision of Citrus Research, Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science, NARO, Shimizu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Shingo GotoDivision of Citrus Research, Institute of Fruit Tree and Tea Science, NARO, Shimizu, Shizuoka, Japan.
Atsushi ToyodaNational Institute of Genetics, Comparative Genomics laboratory, National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, Shizuoka, Japan.
Asao FujiyamaNational Institute of Genetics, Comparative Genomics laboratory, National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, Shizuoka, Japan.
Takako MochizukiNational Institute of Genetics, Center for Information Biology, National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, Shizuoka, Japan.
Hideki NagasakiNational Institute of Genetics, Center for Information Biology, National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, Shizuoka, Japan.
Eli KaminumaNational Institute of Genetics, Center for Information Biology, National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, Shizuoka, Japan.
Yasukazu NakamuraNational Institute of Genetics, Center for Information Biology, National Institute of Genetics, Mishima, Shizuoka, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most indigenous citrus varieties are assumed to be natural hybrids, but their parentage has so far been determined in only a few cases because of their wide genetic diversity and the low transferability of DNA markers. Here we infer the parentage of indigenous citrus varieties using simple sequence repeat and indel markers developed from various citrus genome sequence resources. Parentage tests with 122 known hybrids using the selected DNA markers certify their transferability among those hybrids. Identity tests confirm that most variant strains are selected mutants, but we find four types of kunenbo (Citrus nobilis) and three types of tachibana (Citrus tachibana) for which we suggest different origins. Structure analysis with DNA markers that are in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium deduce three basic taxa coinciding with the current understanding of citrus ancestors. Genotyping analysis of 101 indigenous citrus varieties with 123 selected DNA markers infers the parentages of 22 indigenous citrus varieties including Satsuma, Temple, and iyo, and single parents of 45 indigenous citrus varieties, including kunenbo, C. ichangensis, and Ichang lemon by allele-sharing and parentage tests. Genotyping analysis of chloroplast and mitochondrial genomes using 11 DNA markers classifies their cytoplasmic genotypes into 18 categories and deduces the combination of seed and pollen parents. Likelihood ratio analysis verifies the inferred parentages with significant scores. The reconstructed genealogy identifies 12 types of varieties consisting of Kishu, kunenbo, yuzu, koji, sour orange, dancy, kobeni mikan, sweet orange, tachibana, Cleopatra, willowleaf mandarin, and pummelo, which have played pivotal roles in the occurrence of these indigenous varieties. The inferred parentage of the indigenous varieties confirms their hybrid origins, as found by recent studies.

Indexed as

Genetic VariationGenomicsCell NucleusChloroplastsCitrusDNA, PlantGenetic MarkersGenome, MitochondrialGenome, PlantGenotyping TechniquesPhylogenyDNA, PlantGenetic Markers

Identifiers

PMID27902727
PMCPMC5130255

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.