ArticleScientific reports2021
Assessing the reliability of medicinal Dendrobium sequences in GenBank for botanical species identification.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Establishment of Regeneration Propagation Protocol Based on In Vitro Seeds Development of the Endangered Orchid SpeciesPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- The complete annotated plastome sequences of six genera in the tropical woody Polygonaceae.BMC plant biology · 2024Article
- Strategies for molecular authentication of herbal products: from experimental design to data analysis.Chinese medicine · 2022Review
- Orchidaceae-Derived Anticancer Agents: A Review.Cancers · 2022Review
- Antibacterial activities of indigenous yeasts isolated from pomegranate peels (Journal of advanced pharmaceutical technology & researchArticle
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
DNA-based method is a promising tool in species identification and is widely used in various fields. DNA barcoding method has already been included in different pharmacopoeias for identification of medicinal materials or botanicals. Accuracy and validity of DNA-based methods rely on the accuracy and taxonomic reliability of the DNA sequences in the database to be compared against. Here we evaluated the annotation quality and taxonomic reliability of selected barcode loci (rbcL, matK, psbA-trnH, trnL-trnF and ITS) of 41 medicinal Dendrobium species downloaded from GenBank. Annotations of most accessions are incomplete. Only 53.06% of the 2041 accessions downloaded contain a reference to a voucher specimen. Only 31.60% and 4.8% of the entries are annotated with country of origin and collector or assessor, respectively. Taxonomic reliability of the sequences was evaluated by a Megablast search based on similarity to sequences submitted by other research groups. A small number of sequences (211, 7.14%) was regarded as highly doubted. Moreover, 10 out of 60 complete chloroplast genomes contain highly doubted sequences. Our findings suggest that sequences of GenBank should be used with caution for species-level identification. The scientific community should provide more important information regarding identity and traceability of the sample when they deposit sequences to public databases.
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.