ArticleScientific reports2017
An analysis of Echinacea chloroplast genomes: Implications for future botanical identification.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 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
38 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.
- Analysis of the variation and genetic stability of chloroplast genome of Pinus taeda.BMC genomics · 2026Article
- The complete chloroplast genome sequence and phylogenetic analysis ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026Article
- Characterization of the complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026Article
- The complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026Article
- An integrative approach clarifies species delimitation and biogeographic history ofPlant diversity · 2025Article
- Advances in the Identification Methods of Food-Medicine Homologous Herbal Materials.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Integrating DNA Barcoding Within an Orthogonal Approach for Herbal Product Authentication: A Narrative Review.Phytochemical analysis : PCA · 2025Review
- Utilizing target capture sequencing to resolve the speciation history ofFrontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- The complete chloroplast genome ofFrontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of Asparagus meioclados Levl. and Asparagus munitus Wang et S. C. Chen plastomes and utility of plastomes mutational hotspots.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Deoxyribonucleic Acid Barcoding for the Identification of Botanicals.Progress in the chemistry of organic natural products · 2023Article
- Structural Diversities and Phylogenetic Signals in Plastomes of the Early-Divergent Angiosperms: A Case Study in Saxifragales.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- DNA barcoding: an efficient technology to authenticate plant species of traditional Chinese medicine and recent advances.Chinese medicine · 2022Review
- Characterization of the Chloroplast Genome ofGenes · 2022Article
- Advancements and future prospective of DNA barcodes in the herbal drug industry.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Review
- Phylogenetic Analysis of Wild Species and the Maternal Origin of Cultivars in the GenusFrontiers in plant science · 2022Article
- Utilizing Big Data to Identify Tiny Toxic Components:Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Extremely low nucleotide diversity among thirty-six new chloroplast genome sequences fromPeerJ · 2021Article
- On the Species Delimitation of theFrontiers in plant science · 2021Article
- Chloroplast genomes elucidate diversity, phylogeny, and taxonomy of Pulsatilla (Ranunculaceae).Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Echinacea is a common botanical used in dietary supplements, primarily to treat upper respiratory tract infections and to support immune function. There are currently thought to be nine species in the genus Echinacea. Due to very low molecular divergence among sister species, traditional DNA barcoding has not been successful for differentiation of Echinacea species. Here, we present the use of full chloroplast genomes to distinguish between all 9 reported species. Total DNA was extracted from specimens stored at the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, which had been collected from the wild with species identification documented by experts in the field. We used Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) and CLC Genomics Workbench to assemble complete chloroplast genomes for all nine species. Full chloroplasts unambiguously differentiated all nine species, compared with the very few single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) available with core DNA barcoding markers. SNPs for any two Echinacea chloroplast genomes ranged from 181 to 910, and provided robust data for unambiguous species delimitation. Implications for DNA-based species identification assays derived from chloroplast genome sequences are discussed in light of product safety, adulteration and quality issues.
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.