ArticleScientific reports2021
Calophyllaceae plastomes, their structure and insights in relationships within the clusioids.
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 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Enrichment Probe Sets Combining Universal and Lineage-Specific Targets Help Resolve Recalcitrant Lineages.Molecular ecology resources · 2026Article
- Complete plastid genome and phylogenetic analysis ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026Article
- The complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2026Article
- Chloroplast genomes of Simarouba Aubl., molecular evolution and comparative analyses within Sapindales.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- The complete chloroplast genome and phylogenetic analysis ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2024Article
- The complete chloroplast genome ofMitochondrial DNA. Part B, Resources · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A complete chloroplast genome is not yet available for numerous species of plants. Among the groups that lack plastome information is the clusioid clade (Malpighiales), which includes five families: Bonnetiaceae, Calophyllaceae, Clusiaceae, Hypericaceae, and Podostemaceae. With around 2200 species, it has few published plastomes and most of them are from Podostemaceae. Here we assembled and compared six plastomes from members of the clusioids: five from Calophyllaceae (newly sequenced) and one from Clusiaceae. Putative regions for evolutionary studies were identified and the newly assembled chloroplasts were analyzed with other available chloroplasts for the group, focusing on Calophyllaceae. Our results mostly agree with recent studies which found a general conserved structure, except for the two Podostemaceae species that have a large inversion (trnK-UUU-rbcL) and lack one intron from ycf3. Within Calophyllaceae we observed a longer LSC and reduced IRs in Mahurea exstipulata, resulting in some genic rearrangement, and a short inversion (psbJ-psbE) in Kielmeyera coriacea. Phylogenetic analyses recovered the clusioids and the five families as monophyletic and revealed that conflicts in relationships reported in the literature for the group agree with nodes concentrating uninformative or conflicting gene trees. Our study brings new insights about clusioid plastome architecture and its evolution.
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.