ReviewFrontiers in plant science2023
Progress, challenge and prospect of plant plastome annotation.
Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards whole plastome phylogeography: resolving small genetic distances among European Arnica montana L. with the PlastidPipeline.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative analysis of six new chloroplast genomes in Platanthera (Orchidaceae) enhances understanding of its diversification.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The complete chloroplast genome sequence of Typhonium flagelliforme, an anti-cancer medicinal plant: genome structure, comparative and phylogenetic relationship analysis within Araceae.Functional & integrative genomics · 2026Article
- Plastome evidence repositionsFrontiers in plant science · 2026Article
- Comparative plastomes of fiveAoB PLANTS · 2025Article
- Genomic Phylogenetic Analysis ofEcology and evolution · 2025Article
- PlastidHub: An integrated analysis platform for plastid phylogenomics and comparative genomics.Plant diversity · 2025Article
- Complete chloroplast genomes of 25 mulberry plants: insight into genome characteristics, comparative analysis and phylogenetic relationships.BMC genomics · 2025Article
- Comparative plastome analyses and phylogenetic insights of Elatostema.BMC plant biology · 2025Article
- Comparative and phylogenetic analysis of the chloroplast genomes of four commonly used medicinal cultivars of Chrysanthemums morifolium.BMC plant biology · 2024Article
- The Complete Chloroplast Genome ofGenes · 2024Article
- Comparative Chloroplast Genomes Analysis Provided Adaptive Evolution Insights inInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Polyphyly ofFrontiers in plant science · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The plastome (plastid genome) represents an indispensable molecular data source for studying phylogeny and evolution in plants. Although the plastome size is much smaller than that of nuclear genome, and multiple plastome annotation tools have been specifically developed, accurate annotation of plastomes is still a challenging task. Different plastome annotation tools apply different principles and workflows, and annotation errors frequently occur in published plastomes and those issued in GenBank. It is therefore timely to compare available annotation tools and establish standards for plastome annotation. In this review, we review the basic characteristics of plastomes, trends in the publication of new plastomes, the annotation principles and application of major plastome annotation tools, and common errors in plastome annotation. We propose possible methods to judge pseudogenes and RNA-editing genes, jointly consider sequence similarity, customed algorithms, conserved domain or protein structure. We also propose the necessity of establishing a database of reference plastomes with standardized annotations, and put forward a set of quantitative standards for evaluating plastome annotation quality for the scientific community. In addition, we discuss how to generate standardized GenBank annotation flatfiles for submission and downstream analysis. Finally, we prospect future technologies for plastome annotation integrating plastome annotation approaches with diverse evidences and algorithms of nuclear genome annotation tools. This review will help researchers more efficiently use available tools to achieve high-quality plastome annotation, and promote the process of standardized annotation of the plastome.
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.