ArticlePloS one2022
The complete chloroplast genome sequences of eight Orostachys species: Comparative analysis and assessment of phylogenetic relationships.
Article in PloS one, 2022. 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Phylogenomic study ofFrontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of chloroplast genomes from four species in Quercus section Cyclobalanopsis.BMC genomic data · 2024Article
- First Record of Comparative Plastid Genome Analysis and Phylogenetic Relationships amongGenes · 2024Article
- Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of chloroplast genomes from ten species inFrontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- Evolution of the Araliaceae family involved rapid diversification of the Asian Palmate group and Hydrocotyle specific mutational pressure.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- The complete chloroplast genome sequences of six Hylotelephium species: Comparative genomic analysis and phylogenetic relationships.PloS one · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We analyzed the complete chloroplast genomes of eight Orostachys species and compared the sequences to those of published chloroplast genomes of the congeneric and closely related genera, Meterostachys and Hylotelephium. The total chloroplast genome length of thirteen species, including the eight species analyzed in this study and the five species analyzed in previous studies, ranged from 149,860 (M. sikokianus) to 151,707 bp (H. verticillatum). The overall GC contents of the genomes were almost identical (37.6 to 37.8%). The thirteen chloroplast genomes each contained 113 unique genes comprising 79 protein-coding genes, 30 tRNA genes, and four rRNA genes. Among the annotated genes, sixteen genes contained one or two introns. Although the genome structures of all Orostachys and Hylotelephium species were identical, Meterostachys differed in structure due to a relatively large gene block (trnS-GCU-trnS-GGA) inversion. The nucleotide diversity among the subsect. Orostachys chloroplast genomes was extremely low in all regions, and among the subsect. Appendiculatae, genus Orostachys, and all thirteen chloroplast genomes showed high values of Pi (>0.03) in one, five, or three regions. The phylogenetic analysis showed that Orostachys formed polyphyly, and subsect. Orostachys and Appendiculatae were clustered with Hylotelephium and Meterostachys, respectively, supporting the conclusion that each subsection should be considered as an independent genus. Furthermore, the data supported the taxonomic position of O. margaritifolia and O. iwarenge f. magnus, which were treated as synonyms for O. iwarenge in a previous study, as independent taxa. Our results suggested that O. ramosa and O. japonica f. polycephala were individual variations of O. malacophylla and O. japonica, respectively. The exact taxonomic position of O. latielliptica and the phylogenetic relationship among the three species, O. chongsunensis, O. malacophylla and O. ramosa, should be a topic of future study.
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.