ArticlePeerJ2021
The transition to agricultural cultivation of neo-crops may fail to account for wild genetic diversity patterns: insights from the Cape Floristic Region.
Article in PeerJ, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe global increase in the cultivation of native wild plants has raised concerns regarding potential risks associated with translocating genetic lineages beyond their natural range. This study aimed to investigate whether agricultural cultivation of neo-crops (a) accounts for the levels of genetic diversity present in wild populations, and whether (b) cultivated populations are genetically divergent from wild populations and thus pose a potential threat to wild genetic diversity. LOCATION: The Cape Floristic Region (CFR), located along the southern Cape of South Africa.
methodsHigh Resolution Melt analysis (HRM) coupled with Sanger sequencing was used to screen three non-coding chloroplast DNA loci in
resultsAcross all asseccions, a total of 17 haplotypes were detected, four of which were shared between wild and cultivated populations, while the remaining 13 were only detected in wild populations. Genetic diversity and differentiation was significantly higher in wild populations than in cultivated populations.
conclusionsIf no guidelines exist to facilitate the introduction of native wild plant taxa to a cultivated setting, wild genetic diversity patterns are likely to be compromised by cultivated populations. In the case presented here, cultivation represents a genetic bottleneck, failing to account for rare haplotypes, and may have disrupted species boundaries by initiating interspecific hybridization. More empirical work is required to evaluate the extent to which neo-crop cultivation poses a risk to wild genetic resources in the CFR and globally.
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.