ArticleScientific reports2021
DNA barcoding of medicinal orchids in Asia.
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 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 36 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phylogenetic relationship based on DNA barcodes and comparative analysis of phytochemical contents among Rhynchostylis orchids in Thailand.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A universal DNA-barcode approach to aid species identification in the family Cyperaceae.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- DNA Barcoding Protocol forGenes · 2025Article
- UntanglingGenes · 2025Article
- The rps15-rpl32 intergenic locus is a phylogeographic marker for Latin American Zea mays landrace varieties and subspecies.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- DNA-Barcoding for Cultivar Identification and Intraspecific Diversity Analysis of Agricultural Crops.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- From Phenotypes to Genotypes: Enhancing the Identification ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Unlocking the Genetic Identity of EndangeredGenes · 2024Article
- Phylogenetic Analysis of Rare and EndangeredBiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Growing popularity of herbal medicine has increased the demand of medicinal orchids in the global markets leading to their overharvesting from natural habitats for illegal trade. To stop such illegal trade, the correct identification of orchid species from their traded products is a foremost requirement. Different species of medicinal orchids are traded as their dried or fresh parts (tubers, pseudobulbs, stems), which look similar to each other making it almost impossible to identify them merely based on morphological observation. To overcome this problem, DNA barcoding could be an important method for accurate identification of medicinal orchids. Therefore, this research evaluated DNA barcoding of medicinal orchids in Asia where illegal trade of medicinal orchids has long existed. Based on genetic distance, similarity-based and tree-based methods with sampling nearly 7,000 sequences from five single barcodes (ITS, ITS2, matK, rbcL, trnH-psbA and their seven combinations), this study revealed that DNA barcoding is effective for identifying medicinal orchids. Among single locus, ITS performed the best barcode, whereas ITS + matK exhibited the most efficient barcode among multi-loci. A barcode library as a resource for identifying medicinal orchids has been established which contains about 7,000 sequences of 380 species (i.e. 90%) of medicinal orchids in Asia.
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.