ArticleBMC plant biology2023
Chloroplast genomic comparison provides insights into the evolution of seagrasses.
Article in BMC plant biology, 2023. 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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Multipartite mitochondrial genome evolution in Halophila seagrasses: repeat-driven structural plasticity and selection signatures of marine adaptation.BMC plant biology · 2026Article
- Comparative Genomics and Phylogenetic Analyses ofEcology and evolution · 2025Article
- Phylogeny and evolutionary dynamics of the Rubia genus based on the chloroplast genome of Rubia tibetica.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Complete chloroplast genome of the marine eelgrassMicrobiology resource announcements · 2025Article
- The organelle genomes of the endangered seagrassFrontiers in plant science · 2025Article
- Comparative analysis of chloroplast genome and evolutionary history ofFrontiers in genetics · 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
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSeagrasses are a polyphyletic group of monocotyledonous angiosperms that have evolved to live entirely submerged in marine waters. Thus, these species are ideal for studying plant adaptation to marine environments. Herein, we sequenced the chloroplast (cp) genomes of two seagrass species (Zostera muelleri and Halophila ovalis) and performed a comparative analysis of them with 10 previously published seagrasses, resulting in various novel findings.
resultsThe cp genomes of the seagrasses ranged in size from 143,877 bp (Zostera marina) to 178,261 bp (Thalassia hemprichii), and also varied in size among different families in the following order: Hydrocharitaceae > Cymodoceaceae > Ruppiaceae > Zosteraceae. The length differences between families were mainly related to the expansion and contraction of the IR region. In addition, we screened out 2,751 simple sequence repeats and 1,757 long repeat sequence types in the cp genome sequences of the 12 seagrass species, ultimately finding seven hot spots in coding regions. Interestingly, we found nine genes with positive selection sites, including two ATP subunit genes (atpA and atpF), three ribosome subunit genes (rps4, rps7, and rpl20), one photosystem subunit gene (psbH), and the ycf2, accD, and rbcL genes. These gene regions may have played critical roles in the adaptation of seagrasses to diverse environments. In addition, phylogenetic analysis strongly supported the division of the 12 seagrass species into four previously recognized major clades. Finally, the divergence time of the seagrasses inferred from the cp genome sequences was generally consistent with previous studies.
conclusionsIn this study, we compared chloroplast genomes from 12 seagrass species, covering the main phylogenetic clades. Our findings will provide valuable genetic data for research into the taxonomy, phylogeny, and species evolution of seagrasses.
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.