ArticleAmerican journal of botany2022
Molecular and archaeological evidence on the geographical origin of domestication for Camelina sativa.
Article in American journal of botany, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficient nitrogen remobilization and nitrogen partitioning to seeds in Camelina sativa grown under contrasting nitrogen regimes.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
- Genome-wide identification and diversity of FAD2, FAD3 and FAE1 genes in terms of biotechnological importance in Camelina species.BMC biotechnology · 2024Article
- Exploring genetic diversity, population structure, and subgenome differences in the allopolyploidHorticulture research · 2024Article
- Genetic study for seed germination and shattering inHeliyon · 2024Article
- Overcoming genetic paucity ofFrontiers in plant science · 2023Review
- CRISPR-Cas: A robust technology for enhancing consumer-preferred commercial traits in crops.Frontiers in plant science · 2023Review
- Molecular and archaeological evidence on the geographical origin of domestication for Camelina sativa.American journal of botany · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
premiseCamelina (gold-of-pleasure or false flax) is an ancient oilseed crop with emerging applications in the production of sustainable, low-input biofuels. Previous domestication hypotheses suggested a European or western Asian origin, yet little genetic evidence has existed to assess the geographical origin for this crop, and archaeological data have not been systematically surveyed.
methodsWe utilized genotyping-by-sequencing of 185 accessions of C. sativa and its wild relatives to examine population structure within the crop species and its relationship to populations of its wild progenitor, C. microcarpa; cytotype variation was also assessed in both species. In a complementary analysis, we surveyed the archaeological literature to identify sites with archaeobotanical camelina remains and assess the timing and prevalence of usage across Europe and western Asia.
resultsThe majority of C. microcarpa sampled in Europe and the United States belongs to a variant cytotype (2n = 38) with a distinct evolutionary origin from that of the crop lineage (2n = 40). Populations of C. microcarpa from Transcaucasia (South Caucasus) are most closely related to C. sativa based on cytotype and population structure; in combination with archaeological insights, these data refute prior hypotheses of a European domestication origin.
conclusionsOur findings support a Caucasus, potentially Armenian, origin of C. sativa domestication. We cannot definitively determine whether C. sativa was intentionally targeted for domestication in its own right or instead arose secondarily through selection for agricultural traits in weedy C. sativa, as originally proposed by Vavilov for this species.
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.