Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34697356›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Artificial selection optimizes clonality in chaya (Cnidoscolus aconitifolius).

Miguel A Munguía-Rosas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

1 author.

Miguel A Munguía-RosasLaboratorio de Ecología Terrestre, Departamento de Ecología Humana, Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados del Instituto Politécnico Nacional (Cinvestav), 97310, Mérida, México. munguiarma@cinvestav.mx.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The clonal propagation of crops offers several advantages to growers, such as skipping the juvenile phase, faster growth, and reduced mortality. However, it is not known if the wild ancestors of most clonal crops have a similar ability to reproduce clonally. Therefore, it is unclear whether clonality was an ancestral condition, or if it evolved during domestication in the majority of these crops. Here, I assessed some traits that are relevant to clonal propagation using stem cuttings from chaya (Cnidoscolus aconitifolius) and compared these traits to those of its wild ancestor. Chaya is highly relevant crop to food security in its domestication center (Yucatan Peninsula) and is now cultivated in several countries. Chaya is also an excellent model for assessing the effect of domestication on clonality because wild relatives and selection targets are known. Specifically, I compared resistance to desiccation, water and resource storage, as well as the production of new organs (shoots and leaves) by the stems of wild and domesticated plants. I also compared their performance in root development and clone survival. I found that, relative to their wild ancestors, the stem cuttings of domesticated chaya had 1.1 times greater storage capacity for water and starch. Additionally, the stems of domesticated plants produced 1.25 times more roots, 2.69 times more shoots and 1.94 more leaves, and their clones lived 1.87 times longer than their wild relatives. In conclusion, the results suggest that artificial selection has optimized water and starch storage by stems in chaya. Because these traits also confer greater fitness (i.e. increased fecundity and survival of clones), they can be considered adaptations to clonal propagation in the agroecosystems where this crop is cultivated.

Indexed as

Clonal EvolutionCrops, AgriculturalEuphorbiaceaeReproductionDomesticationPlant DevelopmentQuantitative Trait, Heritable

Identifiers

PMID34697356
PMCPMC8546088

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.