ArticleScientific reports2022
The mitochondrial genome and phylogenetic analysis of Rhacophorus rhodopus.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Mitogenome Characterization and Phylogenetic Insights Into Blind Mole Rats,Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Phylogenetic and Environmental Insights Into the Biogeography of the Western Blacknose Dace,Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Mitochondrial Phylogenomics and Genome Evolution in Anura: Insights From Structure and Gene Order Rearrangements.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Comprehensive Whole-Genome Survey and Analysis of the Naozhou Stock of Large Yellow Croakers (Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Classification of the genus Rhacophorus has been problematic. In particular there has been considerable controversy surrounding the phylogenetic relationships among Rhacophorus rhodopus, R. bipunctatus, and R. reinwardtii. To examine the relationship among these Rhacophorus species, we assembled the complete mitochondrial genome sequence of R. rhodopus. The R. rhodopus genome is 15,789 bp in length with 12 protein-coding genes (PCGs) (losing ND5), two ribosomal genes, 22 transfer RNA genes, and a control region (D-loop). Base composition of the overall sequence was 60.86% for A + T content and 39.14% for C + G content. Most of the PCGs used ATG as a start codon, except for the COX I gene, which used the ATA start codon. COX I and ND6 used AGG and ATP8 stop codons respectively, while ND3 and ND4L used the TAA stop codon. For the remaining seven genes, the stop codons was incomplete. In addition, both 5' and 3' of the control areas had distinct repeating regions. Based on three datasets and two methods (Bayesian inference (BI) and maximum likelihood (ML)), we reconstructed three phylogenetic trees to explore the taxonomic status of the species and the phylogenetic relationship among R. rhodopus, R. bipunctatus and R. reinwardtii. Our results indicated that these three species are non-monophyletic; thus, the phylogenetic relationship among them is complex and difficult to determine. Further, R. rhodopus is divided into three lineages from different parts of China. The two Rhacophorus samples showed very close phylogenetic relationship with R. rhodopus. Our results add to the mitochondrial genome database of amphibians and will help to disentangle the phylogenetic relationships within the Rhacophoridae.
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.