Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34098903›Full record

ArticleBMC plant biology2021

Transcriptomic resources for prairie grass (Bromus catharticus): expressed transcripts, tissue-specific genes, and identification and validation of EST-SSR markers.

Ming Sun, Zhixiao Dong, Jian Yang, Wendan Wu, Chenglin Zhang, Jianbo Zhang, Junming Zhao, Yi Xiong, Shangang Jia, Xiao Ma

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC plant biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Factors affecting the genetic diversity ofFrontiers in plant science · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

10 authors.

Ming SunDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China.
Zhixiao DongDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China.
Jian YangDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China.
Wendan WuDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China.
Chenglin ZhangDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China.
Jianbo ZhangSichuan Academy of Grassland Science, Chengdu, 611731, Sichuan, China.
Junming ZhaoDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China.
Yi XiongDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China.
Shangang JiaCollege of Grassland Science and Technology, China Agricultural University, Beijing, 100193, China. shangang.jia@cau.edu.cn.
Xiao MaDepartment of Grassland Science, College of Animal Science and Technology, Sichuan Agricultural University, Chengdu, 611130, Sichuan, China. maroar@126.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPrairie grass (Bromus catharticus) is a typical cool-season forage crop with high biomass production and fast growth rate during winter and spring. However, its genetic research and breeding has remained stagnant due to limited available genomic resources. The aim of this study was to generate large-scale genomic data using high-throughput transcriptome sequencing, and perform a preliminary validation of EST-SSR markers of B. catharticus.

resultsEleven tissue samples including seeds, leaves, and stems were collected from a new high-yield strain of prairie grass BCS1103. A total of 257,773 unigenes were obtained, of which 193,082 (74.90%) were annotated. Comparison analysis between tissues identified 1803, 3030, and 1570 genes specifically and highly expressed in seed, leaf, and stem, respectively. A total of 37,288 EST-SSRs were identified from unigene sequences, and more than 80,000 primer pairs were designed. We synthesized 420 primer pairs and selected 52 ones with high polymorphisms to estimate genetic diversity and population structure in 24 B. catharticus accessions worldwide. Despite low diversity indicated by an average genetic distance of 0.364, the accessions from South America and Asia and wild accessions showed higher genetic diversity. Moreover, South American accessions showed a pure ancestry, while Asian accessions demonstrated mixed internal relationships, which indicated a different probability of gene flow. Phylogenetic analysis clustered the studied accessions into four clades, being consistent with phenotypic clustering results. Finally, Mantel analysis suggested the total phenotypic variation was mostly contributed by genetic component. Stem diameter, plant height, leaf width, and biomass yield were significantly correlated with genetic data (r > 0.6, P < 0.001), and might be used in the future selection and breeding.

conclusionA genomic resource was generated that could benefit genetic and taxonomic studies, as well as molecular breeding for B. catharticus and its relatives in the future.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingGenes, PlantTranscription, GeneticBromusExpressed Sequence TagsGenetic MarkersMicrosatellite RepeatsPlant ProteinsGenetic MarkersPlant ProteinsBromus catharticusDifferentially expressed genesDiversity analysisMarker developmentTranscriptome sequencing

Identifiers

PMID34098903
PMCPMC8186225

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.