Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30535394›Full record

ArticleSystematic biology2019

A Universal Probe Set for Targeted Sequencing of 353 Nuclear Genes from Any Flowering Plant Designed Using k-Medoids Clustering.

Matthew G Johnson, Lisa Pokorny, Steven Dodsworth, Laura R Botigué, Robyn S Cowan, Alison Devault, Wolf L Eiserhardt, Niroshini Epitawalage, Félix Forest, Jan T Kim and 8 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 226 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
226citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
56.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

226 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 561 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Orchid genome evolution and trait innovation.Journal of integrative plant biology · 2026
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

166 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

18 authors at 9 institutions in 6 countries.

Matthew G JohnsonDepartment of Biological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX 79409, USA.
Lisa PokornyDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Steven DodsworthDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Laura R BotiguéDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Robyn S CowanDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Alison DevaultArbor Biosciences, 5840 Interface Dr, Suite 101, Ann Arbor, MI 48103, USA.
Wolf L EiserhardtDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Niroshini EpitawalageDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Félix ForestDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Jan T KimDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
James H Leebens-MackDepartment of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, 2502 Miller Plant Sciences, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
Ilia J LeitchDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Olivier MaurinDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Douglas E SoltisDepartment of Biology, University of Florida, 220 Bartram Hall, Gainesville, FL 32611-8525, USA.
Pamela S SoltisDepartment of Biology, University of Florida, 220 Bartram Hall, Gainesville, FL 32611-8525, USA.
Gane Ka-Shu WongBGI-Shenzhen, Beishan Industrial Zone, Yantian District, Shenzhen 518083, China.
William J BakerDepartment of Comparative Plant and Fungal Biology, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK.
Norman J WickettPlant Science and Conservation, Chicago Botanic Garden, 1000 Lake Cook Road, Glencoe, IL 60022, USA.
Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew · GBDenver Botanic Gardens · USCenter for Research in Agricultural Genomics · ESFlorida Museum of Natural History · USInterface (United States) · USUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of Bedfordshire · GBUniversity of Florida · USUniversity of Georgia · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sequencing of target-enriched libraries is an efficient and cost-effective method for obtaining DNA sequence data from hundreds of nuclear loci for phylogeny reconstruction. Much of the cost of developing targeted sequencing approaches is associated with the generation of preliminary data needed for the identification of orthologous loci for probe design. In plants, identifying orthologous loci has proven difficult due to a large number of whole-genome duplication events, especially in the angiosperms (flowering plants). We used multiple sequence alignments from over 600 angiosperms for 353 putatively single-copy protein-coding genes identified by the One Thousand Plant Transcriptomes Initiative to design a set of targeted sequencing probes for phylogenetic studies of any angiosperm group. To maximize the phylogenetic potential of the probes, while minimizing the cost of production, we introduce a k-medoids clustering approach to identify the minimum number of sequences necessary to represent each coding sequence in the final probe set. Using this method, 5-15 representative sequences were selected per orthologous locus, representing the sequence diversity of angiosperms more efficiently than if probes were designed using available sequenced genomes alone. To test our approximately 80,000 probes, we hybridized libraries from 42 species spanning all higher-order groups of angiosperms, with a focus on taxa not present in the sequence alignments used to design the probes. Out of a possible 353 coding sequences, we recovered an average of 283 per species and at least 100 in all species. Differences among taxa in sequence recovery could not be explained by relatedness to the representative taxa selected for probe design, suggesting that there is no phylogenetic bias in the probe set. Our probe set, which targeted 260 kbp of coding sequence, achieved a median recovery of 137 kbp per taxon in coding regions, a maximum recovery of 250 kbp, and an additional median of 212 kbp per taxon in flanking non-coding regions across all species. These results suggest that the Angiosperms353 probe set described here is effective for any group of flowering plants and would be useful for phylogenetic studies from the species level to higher-order groups, including the entire angiosperm clade itself.

Indexed as

DNA ProbesCluster AnalysisMagnoliopsidaSequence Analysis, DNADNA ProbesAngiospermsHyb-Seqk-means clusteringk-medoids clusteringmachine learningnuclear genesphylogenomicssequence capturetarget enrichment

Identifiers

PMID30535394
PMCPMC6568016
OpenAlexW2950352437

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.