Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33772307›Full record

ArticleG3 (Bethesda, Md.)2021

Social network analysis of the genealogy of strawberry: retracing the wild roots of heirloom and modern cultivars.

Dominique D A Pincot, Mirko Ledda, Mitchell J Feldmann, Michael A Hardigan, Thomas J Poorten, Daniel E Runcie, Christopher Heffelfinger, Stephen L Dellaporta, Glenn S Cole, Steven J Knapp

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in G3 (Bethesda, Md.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing 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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Why usefulness is rarely useful.G3 (Bethesda, Md.) · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Dominique D A PincotDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Mirko LeddaDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Mitchell J FeldmannDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Michael A HardiganDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Thomas J PoortenDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Daniel E RuncieDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Christopher HeffelfingerDepartment of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
Stephen L DellaportaDepartment of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
Glenn S ColeDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.
Steven J KnappDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA 95616, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The widely recounted story of the origin of cultivated strawberry (Fragaria × ananassa) oversimplifies the complex interspecific hybrid ancestry of the highly admixed populations from which heirloom and modern cultivars have emerged. To develop deeper insights into the three-century-long domestication history of strawberry, we reconstructed the genealogy as deeply as possible-pedigree records were assembled for 8,851 individuals, including 2,656 cultivars developed since 1775. The parents of individuals with unverified or missing pedigree records were accurately identified by applying an exclusion analysis to array-genotyped single-nucleotide polymorphisms. We identified 187 wild octoploid and 1,171 F. × ananassa founders in the genealogy, from the earliest hybrids to modern cultivars. The pedigree networks for cultivated strawberry are exceedingly complex labyrinths of ancestral interconnections formed by diverse hybrid ancestry, directional selection, migration, admixture, bottlenecks, overlapping generations, and recurrent hybridization with common ancestors that have unequally contributed allelic diversity to heirloom and modern cultivars. Fifteen to 333 ancestors were predicted to have transmitted 90% of the alleles found in country-, region-, and continent-specific populations. Using parent-offspring edges in the global pedigree network, we found that selection cycle lengths over the past 200 years of breeding have been extraordinarily long (16.0-16.9 years/generation), but decreased to a present-day range of 6.0-10.0 years/generation. Our analyses uncovered conspicuous differences in the ancestry and structure of North American and European populations, and shed light on forces that have shaped phenotypic diversity in F. × ananassa.

Indexed as

DomesticationFragariaHybridization, GeneticPlant Breedingbiodiversityconservation geneticsDNA forensicsdomesticationFragariakinship

Identifiers

PMID33772307
PMCPMC8022721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.